56979 cr points
Send Message:   46 / M / Center of the Uni...
 Offline
|
Molier wrote:
That's what happens when you report every single post that you simply disagree with.
I'm particularly interested on why people think "homosexuality being" a sin is an incorrect interpretation of the Bible, and especially how it is taking it out of context. If you know the answer to this, feel free to answer.
Well, there's a lot of things in the bible that we don't agree with today. you could use intreptations of the bible to justify slavery. or public vigilante stonings of people who wore the wrong clothing or dared to work on sunday. If we stuck to a literal interpretation of lividicus no christian nor jew should ever visit red lobster. eating shellfish is an abomination.
so... yeah.. what makes homosexuality so special?
Be careful with your pronouns. I'm not the one you should be addressing about reporting posts. I haven't bothered doing that in a long time. .. years I think.
|
|
|
With the exception of your posts, which I've nothing to do with them, I only reported almost all of Molier's post on this thread as either "flaming" or "trolling" respectively. The CR forum mods are capable of moral reasoning when demanded. My guess would be that some of your own replies to Molier's posts also got deleted as a result.
|
22 cr points
Send Message: 51 / M
Offline
|
papagolfwhiskey wrote:
Well, there's a lot of things in the bible that we don't agree with today. you could use intreptations of the bible to justify slavery. or public vigilante stonings of people who wore the wrong clothing or dared to work on sunday. If we stuck to a literal interpretation of lividicus no christian nor jew should ever visit red lobster. eating shellfish is an abomination.
so... yeah.. what makes homosexuality so special?
The Bible specifically states that homosexuality is a Sin. The reason the Canada Church celebrates Gay Marriage is because they don't want to imply that homosexuals are not a child of God. (according to your source)
Still, it is celebrating Gay Marriage. In other words, the Christian Church is okay to celebrate bestiality and all other sinful conducts in the future. Now I'm going to stop being harsh with my words so I would like you to answer this, and also why do homosexuals need to be celebrated by Christian Churches in the first place?
|
6268 cr points
Send Message: 22 / M / The Netherlands
Offline
|
papagolfwhiskey wrote:
Honestly the foul languange and ignorant voices on this thread make me sick. I'll be be back in a week or so to see if people have calmed down and learned to be civil again.
Ciao for now.
Do no such thing! It's not a good thing to run from ignorance (including mine), fight ignorance with reason because that is the only way it will dissappear.
I know it sometimes is frustrating, but if you presevere you might see results, and that will make everything worthwile ^^
|
56979 cr points
Send Message: 46 / M / Center of the Uni...
Offline
|
Molier wrote:
papagolfwhiskey wrote:
Well, there's a lot of things in the bible that we don't agree with today. you could use intreptations of the bible to justify slavery. or public vigilante stonings of people who wore the wrong clothing or dared to work on sunday. If we stuck to a literal interpretation of lividicus no christian nor jew should ever visit red lobster. eating shellfish is an abomination.
so... yeah.. what makes homosexuality so special?
The Bible specifically states that homosexuality is a Sin. The reason the Canada Church celebrates Gay Marriage is because they don't want to imply that homosexuals are not a child of God. (according to your source)
Still, it is celebrating Gay Marriage. In other words, the Christian Church is okay to celebrate bestiality and all other sinful conducts in the future. Now I'm going to stop being harsh with my words so I would like you to answer this, and also why do homosexuals need to be celebrated by Christian Churches in the first place?
The bible specifically states I can own slaves not of my nation. Since You're not Canadian, Can I own you?
This GUY said it all better than I ever could...
http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/drlaura.asp
|
56486 cr points
Send Message: 27 / M / Irish/German - Am...
Offline
|
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide papagolfwhiskey wrote:
AppIejack wrote:
papagolfwhiskey wrote:
Why don't we make it fair for everyone and abolish marriage as a legal entity. That's proper separation between church and state. Wow. you don't know many gays do you? just a blanket statement that everyone is a hyprocrite who wants to walk down the isle.
funny thing is, it's not even a debate where I come from. We've had gay marriage for over nearly (perhaps over) a decade and I've yet to see any damage done to it .. at least none that rivals what most heterosexual movie stars do.
I dont know many gay guys, but listening to all the gay marriage advocates pisses me off. But youre right. Marriage needs to be defined properly. It's just, over here, there's a bunch of gays screaming for marriage and equal treatment when there's already civil union which needs improvement.
But really, even though Ive never seen one, I would be insulted if I saw two gay men or women in a church or anywhere wearing tuxedos or white dresses walking down celebrating their marriage, if I were one of those old religious folks. Didn't the whole thing start from religion anyway?
But there are congregations in my country who wouldn't be insulted and instead would be supportive. And in your country it's not possible to marry ANYWHERE. not before a JP. Not with the blessing of a druid, pastor, or preist who doesn't care about homosexuality. Don't you find that insulting? Religion is keeping you from getting married in a secular courtroom? what's up with that. certain christian sects are prevent other christians and non christians from blessing gay marriages. You don't find that insulting?
as for the advocates do you listen to them directly or filtered through a news outlet like Fox?
Do you know how easy it is to become a "priest" for marriage here? It is one online test and a certificate. The funny thing is Applejack agreed with you on the topic of "marriage needs to be defined more clearly here". I have considered civil unions to be a stop-gap measure here (to please both parties) but in the end it is like saying "Straight marriage is better than gay marriage" well for me anyways. I do appreciate your unique point of view I just happen to disagree with it. I will say I have met a few people who are advocates for gay marriage who are just complete assholes about it so I know where you are coming from (somewhat).
As for the whole "priest" thing ... if I can get married in Las Vegas by Elvis I really don't see a huge problem in "separation of church and state" for regular marriage. I do see the anti-gay marriage as legislation aimed based on religious beliefs though and I do not like it.
|
|
|
Molier wrote:
That's what happens when you report every single post that you simply disagree with.
I'm particularly interested on why people think "homosexuality being" a sin is an incorrect interpretation of the Bible, and especially how it is taking it out of context. If you know the answer to this, feel free to answer. No, that's when the CR forum mods found your earlier posts as "flaming" and "trolling" as my reports had suggested. So you can stop grinding that axe of yours on someone who doesn't deserve it.
And your personal interest on biblical interpretation has nothing to do with gay marriage in Canada, simply because as a secular nation, the Canadian federal government can legally grant homosexual couples marriage status without relying on religious dogmas since 2004.
|
22 cr points
Send Message: 51 / M
Offline
|
Sorry, that won't work against me. I'm not even Christian. Does it say that it is a Sin to not own a slave? Either way, it's irrelevant whether the Christians contradict themselves in other places.
It is specifically stated that homosexuality is a Sin. Homosexuality is a Sin. The Christian Church is celebrating Homosexuality. Therefore, the Christian Church is celebrating Sins.
|
6268 cr points
Send Message: 22 / M / The Netherlands
Offline
|
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide AppIejack wrote:
amersfoort wrote:
AppIejack wrote:
Hah! Being a lesbian myself, I must say the idea of gay marriage is retarded. It's like how back in school, when all of us cool kids would play tag, then the teacher forces us to let the kid with a mental disability play as well. (when he can't even run!)
Make your own game fellas, it's significantly rude to the people that value marriage as a sacred ceremony between man and woman. Don't ruin the game for everyone, just because you want to be included! It pisses me off to see how stupid some gay marriage advocates can be.
Now I find your explanation of the situation and result quite lacking (regarding the game of tag).
Despite the child not being able to run, and thus not being able to fully participate in tag, the child was for a small amount of time, treated normal, and playing with his/her fellow classmates.
Can you not see how happy that might have made the child? This might have not been like that in this specific case, but I can imagine that for others such an event would have brought a lot of happyness. Just because the rest had to get used to it for a second, you deny the child to be happy.
It's significantly rude to deny others the privilege you hold dear, are you really not able to enjoy marriage if gays can marry? Will it make your relation with your man/wife less awesome? If so, then for what reason are you marrying that partner?
Honestly there is no reasonable argument to deny gays their right to marry.
It's significantly rude to deny others the privilege you hold dear?
Really?
Its a privilege to be able to go to the girls bathroom if you're a girl. So that's wrong? Men should be allowed to go too. Wtf? Im simply saying that its stupid how gays want to marry, because marriage does not conform to gays.
"There is no reasonable argument to deny gays their right to marry" - look, my first analogy was simply being realistic. A mentally disabled child who can't run can't play tag with everyone else, simply because it will ruin the game. It doesnt matter if you think "everyone is the same", because it's simply not true.
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Molier wrote:
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Syndicaidramon wrote:
Rest assured. I NEVER insult people for no reason. And like I said, I did not say it with the intention of insulting you. I simply used the insult as a tool to draw comparison with your ignorant way of thinking, to the ignorant nature of the neanderthal.
And no, I didn't. All I saw you do was compare homosexuality to lazy-eye and other ignorant stuff.
The most beliveable reason I saw you make is that accepting homosexuality would make it more common. Which is a really stupid reason.
Prisons are a lousy argument against it, because the conditions in prison are totally different from the conditions in the outside world.
As for the identity crisis argument... well that doesn't hold water either.
Gender roles are already starting to blur because of our modernized society. The time where men had to be big and strong, and had to take care of his family because the woman is too weak to make it on her own is long gone. Women aren't weak anymore. And because of that, in addition to the advancements in technology, that old ideal of how men should be no longer serves any practical purpose.
Your argument of this being a bad thing only works in a world where people have no ability to establish an identity for themselves. A world where conformity is the only way to do so. But that is not true. People are perfectly capable of establishing their own identities without having to conform to gender roles or stereotypes. And not being burdened or pressured into conformity is a good thing.
That doesn't mean the big, strong man will die out. We still have ideals of how a man should look http://munfitnessblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/ryan-reynolds-toned-body.jpg and for how a woman should look http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9jELGhDpjuA/TCiF6OOL97I/AAAAAAAAA-Y/IqfFscZxrO8/s1600/ideal-body.jp. So those archetypes won't die out anyway. Besides, sometimes you still need "a man" to do the heavy lifting, simply because they have a natural bigger upper body strength than woman.
What it means is just that people can be whoever they choose to be without being prosecuted, discriminated against or bullied for being who they are.
Gender biases are a bad thing and must be removed. And they are getting removed naturally, by the progress of society. Not by homosexuality.
Besides, I don't know if you are aware of this, but most hardcore gay men like burly, muscular, manly men. So that's another thing that makes your argument useless.
And I know I focused most on the male part of this, but hey... those are the gender roles that are being removed the most.
How you think that acceptance of homosexuals will lead to MORE bullying, I cannot possibly imagine.
Not accepting something will ALWAYS lead to bullying. If if people didn't look at homosexuals with the attitude that "it is wrong", homosexuals wouldn't be discriminated against or bullied.
And that is why acceptance for homosexuality is necessary. Because you shouldn't discriminate or bully someone for being who they are.
It is not about promoting homosexuality. It's just about accepting that some people are homosexuals, and that we shouldn't prosecute or discriminate against them for that.
It is just about acceptance, and only that.
Just like how I accept that people can smoke tobacco if they want to. Just because my friend smokes tobacco, doesn't mean I will.
And homosexuality is not comparable to pedophilia. Sexual activity with children is NOT the same as sexual activity between two grown and mature adults.
So don't even try to use that argument. And no, I didn't. All I saw you do was compare homosexuality to lazy-eye and other ignorant stuff.The most beliveable reason I saw you make is that accepting homosexuality would make it more common. Which is a really stupid reason.Prisons are a lousy argument against it, because the conditions in prison are totally different from the conditions in the outside world.
What an UNRELATED refutation to whatever she was implying!
As for the identity crisis argument... well that doesn't hold water either.
Gender roles are already starting to blur because of our modernized society. The time where men had to be big and strong, and had to take care of his family because the woman is too weak to make it on her own is long gone. Women aren't weak anymore. And because of that, in addition to the advancements in technology, that old ideal of how men should be no longer serves any practical purpose.
Your argument of this being a bad thing only works in a world where people have no ability to establish an identity for themselves. A world where conformity is the only way to do so. But that is not true. People are perfectly capable of establishing their own identities without having to conform to gender roles or stereotypes. And not being burdened or pressured into conformity is a good thing. Besides, I don't know if you are aware of this, but most hardcore gay men like burly, muscular, manly men. So that's another thing that makes your argument useless.
And I know I focused most on the male part of this, but hey... those are the gender roles that are being removed the most. How you think that acceptance of homosexuals will lead to MORE bullying, I cannot possibly imagine.
Not accepting something will ALWAYS lead to bullying. If if people didn't look at homosexuals with the attitude that "it is wrong", homosexuals wouldn't be discriminated against or bullied.
And that is why acceptance for homosexuality is necessary. Because you shouldn't discriminate or bully someone for being who they are. It is not about promoting homosexuality. It's just about accepting that some people are homosexuals, and that we shouldn't prosecute or discriminate against them for that.
It is just about acceptance, and only that.
Just like how I accept that people can smoke tobacco if they want to. Just because my friend smokes tobacco, doesn't mean I will.And homosexuality is not comparable to pedophilia. Sexual activity with children is NOT the same as sexual activity between two grown and mature adults.
So don't even try to use that argument.
People! If your opinion is so incredibly true and powerful, why must you rely on rhetoric to win your argument?
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Molier wrote:
amersfoort wrote:
Now I find your position quite cowardly, it's like you're waiting for the winner and then you'll start cheering for him/her.
Apathy is cowardice!? Oh my.
amersfoort wrote:
I lie, I have stolen and I love to take your lords name in vain, however, you claim not to judge people, yet you do, you judge me as a sinner,
Isn't that your ''lords'' job? And not yours? So just saying that you're right doesn't make you right at this moment. In your post you said you didn't judge people, yet you obviously do.
And you also fail to provide evidence indicating that homosexuality is wrong, you're just another christian saying homosexuality is wrong cause the bible says so, how boring and how empty.
You obviously don't know what a Christian is, Son! What the Bible says is absolute.
papagolfwhiskey wrote:
And for a moment I felt like Diogenes with his lamp who had found the one open minded self-proclaimed Christian. So.. in your mind. the Largest non-catholic group of christians in Canada ... is not christian. Just so I'm clear on this.
Any Christian Church that celebrates homosexual marriage is clearly up for it only for the money, a fool, or a fake Christian.
I'm not even Christian!
LMAO wow a Christian church that conducts weddings for gays? Which country is this?
Everyone is the same in the sence that everyone is equal and has the same sets of rights. So to deny others your privilege is rude and immoral.
However I do agree that a priest should be able to refuse marrying a gay couple, unless of course he is (even partly) financed by the state.
You again fail to notice the handicapped child itself, was it happy it could play tag or was it not? the game didn't change with him joining, so it didn't ''ruin'' it. You might have enjoyed it less, but that is your own personal opinion and thus problem. To deny that child the right to play tag on that base is cruel.
|
22 cr points
Send Message: 51 / M
Offline
|
To Mods: Apparently DomFortress has been reporting all of my posts as "trolling" and "flaming". I would like to point out that my posts are very relevant to the topic and simply because many people disagree does not mean it should be deleted. On the Forum Rules it is pointed out that the topics here are sensitive so don't get offended simply because you disagree. Furthermore I would like to point out that DomFortress did not answer my question thus it can be concluded that he is the troll here.
DomFortress wrote:
No, that's when the CR forum mods found your earlier posts as "flaming" and "trolling" as my reports had suggested. So you can stop grinding that axe of yours on someone who doesn't deserve it.
And your personal interest on biblical interpretation has nothing to do with gay marriage in Canada, simply because as a secular nation, the Canadian federal government can legally grant homosexual couples marriage status without relying on religious dogmas since 2004.
I'm going to put this nice and simple:
You said Homosexuality being a Sin is an out-of-context interpretation.
Proof. Proof. Proof.
EDIT: Considering you reported this post without answering, I'll take that as a "No I just made it up on the spot".
|
56486 cr points
Send Message: 27 / M / Irish/German - Am...
Offline
|
Actually I just did some digging around and the idea that you have to be a priest to be married seems to be totally wrong. Here I live in Texas and found this.
http://marriage.about.com/cs/marriagelicenses/p/texas.htm
Scroll down to officiants to see what I mean. |
6268 cr points
Send Message: 22 / M / The Netherlands
Offline
|
Molier wrote:
amersfoort wrote:
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide AppIejack wrote:
amersfoort wrote:
AppIejack wrote:
Hah! Being a lesbian myself, I must say the idea of gay marriage is retarded. It's like how back in school, when all of us cool kids would play tag, then the teacher forces us to let the kid with a mental disability play as well. (when he can't even run!)
Make your own game fellas, it's significantly rude to the people that value marriage as a sacred ceremony between man and woman. Don't ruin the game for everyone, just because you want to be included! It pisses me off to see how stupid some gay marriage advocates can be.
Now I find your explanation of the situation and result quite lacking (regarding the game of tag).
Despite the child not being able to run, and thus not being able to fully participate in tag, the child was for a small amount of time, treated normal, and playing with his/her fellow classmates.
Can you not see how happy that might have made the child? This might have not been like that in this specific case, but I can imagine that for others such an event would have brought a lot of happyness. Just because the rest had to get used to it for a second, you deny the child to be happy.
It's significantly rude to deny others the privilege you hold dear, are you really not able to enjoy marriage if gays can marry? Will it make your relation with your man/wife less awesome? If so, then for what reason are you marrying that partner?
Honestly there is no reasonable argument to deny gays their right to marry.
It's significantly rude to deny others the privilege you hold dear?
Really?
Its a privilege to be able to go to the girls bathroom if you're a girl. So that's wrong? Men should be allowed to go too. Wtf? Im simply saying that its stupid how gays want to marry, because marriage does not conform to gays.
"There is no reasonable argument to deny gays their right to marry" - look, my first analogy was simply being realistic. A mentally disabled child who can't run can't play tag with everyone else, simply because it will ruin the game. It doesnt matter if you think "everyone is the same", because it's simply not true.
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Molier wrote:
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Syndicaidramon wrote:
Rest assured. I NEVER insult people for no reason. And like I said, I did not say it with the intention of insulting you. I simply used the insult as a tool to draw comparison with your ignorant way of thinking, to the ignorant nature of the neanderthal.
And no, I didn't. All I saw you do was compare homosexuality to lazy-eye and other ignorant stuff.
The most beliveable reason I saw you make is that accepting homosexuality would make it more common. Which is a really stupid reason.
Prisons are a lousy argument against it, because the conditions in prison are totally different from the conditions in the outside world.
As for the identity crisis argument... well that doesn't hold water either.
Gender roles are already starting to blur because of our modernized society. The time where men had to be big and strong, and had to take care of his family because the woman is too weak to make it on her own is long gone. Women aren't weak anymore. And because of that, in addition to the advancements in technology, that old ideal of how men should be no longer serves any practical purpose.
Your argument of this being a bad thing only works in a world where people have no ability to establish an identity for themselves. A world where conformity is the only way to do so. But that is not true. People are perfectly capable of establishing their own identities without having to conform to gender roles or stereotypes. And not being burdened or pressured into conformity is a good thing.
That doesn't mean the big, strong man will die out. We still have ideals of how a man should look http://munfitnessblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/ryan-reynolds-toned-body.jpg and for how a woman should look http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9jELGhDpjuA/TCiF6OOL97I/AAAAAAAAA-Y/IqfFscZxrO8/s1600/ideal-body.jp. So those archetypes won't die out anyway. Besides, sometimes you still need "a man" to do the heavy lifting, simply because they have a natural bigger upper body strength than woman.
What it means is just that people can be whoever they choose to be without being prosecuted, discriminated against or bullied for being who they are.
Gender biases are a bad thing and must be removed. And they are getting removed naturally, by the progress of society. Not by homosexuality.
Besides, I don't know if you are aware of this, but most hardcore gay men like burly, muscular, manly men. So that's another thing that makes your argument useless.
And I know I focused most on the male part of this, but hey... those are the gender roles that are being removed the most.
How you think that acceptance of homosexuals will lead to MORE bullying, I cannot possibly imagine.
Not accepting something will ALWAYS lead to bullying. If if people didn't look at homosexuals with the attitude that "it is wrong", homosexuals wouldn't be discriminated against or bullied.
And that is why acceptance for homosexuality is necessary. Because you shouldn't discriminate or bully someone for being who they are.
It is not about promoting homosexuality. It's just about accepting that some people are homosexuals, and that we shouldn't prosecute or discriminate against them for that.
It is just about acceptance, and only that.
Just like how I accept that people can smoke tobacco if they want to. Just because my friend smokes tobacco, doesn't mean I will.
And homosexuality is not comparable to pedophilia. Sexual activity with children is NOT the same as sexual activity between two grown and mature adults.
So don't even try to use that argument. And no, I didn't. All I saw you do was compare homosexuality to lazy-eye and other ignorant stuff.The most beliveable reason I saw you make is that accepting homosexuality would make it more common. Which is a really stupid reason.Prisons are a lousy argument against it, because the conditions in prison are totally different from the conditions in the outside world.
What an UNRELATED refutation to whatever she was implying!
As for the identity crisis argument... well that doesn't hold water either.
Gender roles are already starting to blur because of our modernized society. The time where men had to be big and strong, and had to take care of his family because the woman is too weak to make it on her own is long gone. Women aren't weak anymore. And because of that, in addition to the advancements in technology, that old ideal of how men should be no longer serves any practical purpose.
Your argument of this being a bad thing only works in a world where people have no ability to establish an identity for themselves. A world where conformity is the only way to do so. But that is not true. People are perfectly capable of establishing their own identities without having to conform to gender roles or stereotypes. And not being burdened or pressured into conformity is a good thing. Besides, I don't know if you are aware of this, but most hardcore gay men like burly, muscular, manly men. So that's another thing that makes your argument useless.
And I know I focused most on the male part of this, but hey... those are the gender roles that are being removed the most. How you think that acceptance of homosexuals will lead to MORE bullying, I cannot possibly imagine.
Not accepting something will ALWAYS lead to bullying. If if people didn't look at homosexuals with the attitude that "it is wrong", homosexuals wouldn't be discriminated against or bullied.
And that is why acceptance for homosexuality is necessary. Because you shouldn't discriminate or bully someone for being who they are. It is not about promoting homosexuality. It's just about accepting that some people are homosexuals, and that we shouldn't prosecute or discriminate against them for that.
It is just about acceptance, and only that.
Just like how I accept that people can smoke tobacco if they want to. Just because my friend smokes tobacco, doesn't mean I will.And homosexuality is not comparable to pedophilia. Sexual activity with children is NOT the same as sexual activity between two grown and mature adults.
So don't even try to use that argument.
People! If your opinion is so incredibly true and powerful, why must you rely on rhetoric to win your argument?
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Molier wrote:
amersfoort wrote:
Now I find your position quite cowardly, it's like you're waiting for the winner and then you'll start cheering for him/her.
Apathy is cowardice!? Oh my.
amersfoort wrote:
I lie, I have stolen and I love to take your lords name in vain, however, you claim not to judge people, yet you do, you judge me as a sinner,
Isn't that your ''lords'' job? And not yours? So just saying that you're right doesn't make you right at this moment. In your post you said you didn't judge people, yet you obviously do.
And you also fail to provide evidence indicating that homosexuality is wrong, you're just another christian saying homosexuality is wrong cause the bible says so, how boring and how empty.
You obviously don't know what a Christian is, Son! What the Bible says is absolute.
papagolfwhiskey wrote:
And for a moment I felt like Diogenes with his lamp who had found the one open minded self-proclaimed Christian. So.. in your mind. the Largest non-catholic group of christians in Canada ... is not christian. Just so I'm clear on this.
Any Christian Church that celebrates homosexual marriage is clearly up for it only for the money, a fool, or a fake Christian.
I'm not even Christian!
LMAO wow a Christian church that conducts weddings for gays? Which country is this?
Everyone is the same in the sence that everyone is equal and has the same sets of rights. So to deny others your privilege is rude and immoral.
However I do agree that a priest should be able to refuse marrying a gay couple, unless of course he is (even partly) financed by the state.
You again fail to notice the handicapped child itself, was it happy it could play tag or was it not? the game didn't change with him joining, so it didn't ''ruin'' it. You might have enjoyed it less, but that is your own personal opinion and thus problem. To deny that child the right to play tag on that base is cruel.
Christian priests shouldn't be offered the option of not marrying a gay couple. They should not be allowed to. Otherwise they aren't entitled to be a Christian priest. Priests are supposed to be representatives of their religion. That is why they are only doing it for the money, or are fake Christians.
Since I doubt there is a definition of the word ''christian'' I can safely say that anyone who proclaims to be a christian, is a christian. To say that they are not allowed to cherry pick from their religion is to say that on this day, no true christian exists any more, by my standards a fine statement, however it would make the religion topic even more inconvenient than it already is.
|
22 cr points
Send Message: 51 / M
Offline
|
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide amersfoort wrote:
Molier wrote:
amersfoort wrote:
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide AppIejack wrote:
amersfoort wrote:
AppIejack wrote:
Hah! Being a lesbian myself, I must say the idea of gay marriage is retarded. It's like how back in school, when all of us cool kids would play tag, then the teacher forces us to let the kid with a mental disability play as well. (when he can't even run!)
Make your own game fellas, it's significantly rude to the people that value marriage as a sacred ceremony between man and woman. Don't ruin the game for everyone, just because you want to be included! It pisses me off to see how stupid some gay marriage advocates can be.
Now I find your explanation of the situation and result quite lacking (regarding the game of tag).
Despite the child not being able to run, and thus not being able to fully participate in tag, the child was for a small amount of time, treated normal, and playing with his/her fellow classmates.
Can you not see how happy that might have made the child? This might have not been like that in this specific case, but I can imagine that for others such an event would have brought a lot of happyness. Just because the rest had to get used to it for a second, you deny the child to be happy.
It's significantly rude to deny others the privilege you hold dear, are you really not able to enjoy marriage if gays can marry? Will it make your relation with your man/wife less awesome? If so, then for what reason are you marrying that partner?
Honestly there is no reasonable argument to deny gays their right to marry.
It's significantly rude to deny others the privilege you hold dear?
Really?
Its a privilege to be able to go to the girls bathroom if you're a girl. So that's wrong? Men should be allowed to go too. Wtf? Im simply saying that its stupid how gays want to marry, because marriage does not conform to gays.
"There is no reasonable argument to deny gays their right to marry" - look, my first analogy was simply being realistic. A mentally disabled child who can't run can't play tag with everyone else, simply because it will ruin the game. It doesnt matter if you think "everyone is the same", because it's simply not true.
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Molier wrote:
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Syndicaidramon wrote:
Rest assured. I NEVER insult people for no reason. And like I said, I did not say it with the intention of insulting you. I simply used the insult as a tool to draw comparison with your ignorant way of thinking, to the ignorant nature of the neanderthal.
And no, I didn't. All I saw you do was compare homosexuality to lazy-eye and other ignorant stuff.
The most beliveable reason I saw you make is that accepting homosexuality would make it more common. Which is a really stupid reason.
Prisons are a lousy argument against it, because the conditions in prison are totally different from the conditions in the outside world.
As for the identity crisis argument... well that doesn't hold water either.
Gender roles are already starting to blur because of our modernized society. The time where men had to be big and strong, and had to take care of his family because the woman is too weak to make it on her own is long gone. Women aren't weak anymore. And because of that, in addition to the advancements in technology, that old ideal of how men should be no longer serves any practical purpose.
Your argument of this being a bad thing only works in a world where people have no ability to establish an identity for themselves. A world where conformity is the only way to do so. But that is not true. People are perfectly capable of establishing their own identities without having to conform to gender roles or stereotypes. And not being burdened or pressured into conformity is a good thing.
That doesn't mean the big, strong man will die out. We still have ideals of how a man should look http://munfitnessblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/ryan-reynolds-toned-body.jpg and for how a woman should look http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9jELGhDpjuA/TCiF6OOL97I/AAAAAAAAA-Y/IqfFscZxrO8/s1600/ideal-body.jp. So those archetypes won't die out anyway. Besides, sometimes you still need "a man" to do the heavy lifting, simply because they have a natural bigger upper body strength than woman.
What it means is just that people can be whoever they choose to be without being prosecuted, discriminated against or bullied for being who they are.
Gender biases are a bad thing and must be removed. And they are getting removed naturally, by the progress of society. Not by homosexuality.
Besides, I don't know if you are aware of this, but most hardcore gay men like burly, muscular, manly men. So that's another thing that makes your argument useless.
And I know I focused most on the male part of this, but hey... those are the gender roles that are being removed the most.
How you think that acceptance of homosexuals will lead to MORE bullying, I cannot possibly imagine.
Not accepting something will ALWAYS lead to bullying. If if people didn't look at homosexuals with the attitude that "it is wrong", homosexuals wouldn't be discriminated against or bullied.
And that is why acceptance for homosexuality is necessary. Because you shouldn't discriminate or bully someone for being who they are.
It is not about promoting homosexuality. It's just about accepting that some people are homosexuals, and that we shouldn't prosecute or discriminate against them for that.
It is just about acceptance, and only that.
Just like how I accept that people can smoke tobacco if they want to. Just because my friend smokes tobacco, doesn't mean I will.
And homosexuality is not comparable to pedophilia. Sexual activity with children is NOT the same as sexual activity between two grown and mature adults.
So don't even try to use that argument. And no, I didn't. All I saw you do was compare homosexuality to lazy-eye and other ignorant stuff.The most beliveable reason I saw you make is that accepting homosexuality would make it more common. Which is a really stupid reason.Prisons are a lousy argument against it, because the conditions in prison are totally different from the conditions in the outside world.
What an UNRELATED refutation to whatever she was implying!
As for the identity crisis argument... well that doesn't hold water either.
Gender roles are already starting to blur because of our modernized society. The time where men had to be big and strong, and had to take care of his family because the woman is too weak to make it on her own is long gone. Women aren't weak anymore. And because of that, in addition to the advancements in technology, that old ideal of how men should be no longer serves any practical purpose.
Your argument of this being a bad thing only works in a world where people have no ability to establish an identity for themselves. A world where conformity is the only way to do so. But that is not true. People are perfectly capable of establishing their own identities without having to conform to gender roles or stereotypes. And not being burdened or pressured into conformity is a good thing. Besides, I don't know if you are aware of this, but most hardcore gay men like burly, muscular, manly men. So that's another thing that makes your argument useless.
And I know I focused most on the male part of this, but hey... those are the gender roles that are being removed the most. How you think that acceptance of homosexuals will lead to MORE bullying, I cannot possibly imagine.
Not accepting something will ALWAYS lead to bullying. If if people didn't look at homosexuals with the attitude that "it is wrong", homosexuals wouldn't be discriminated against or bullied.
And that is why acceptance for homosexuality is necessary. Because you shouldn't discriminate or bully someone for being who they are. It is not about promoting homosexuality. It's just about accepting that some people are homosexuals, and that we shouldn't prosecute or discriminate against them for that.
It is just about acceptance, and only that.
Just like how I accept that people can smoke tobacco if they want to. Just because my friend smokes tobacco, doesn't mean I will.And homosexuality is not comparable to pedophilia. Sexual activity with children is NOT the same as sexual activity between two grown and mature adults.
So don't even try to use that argument.
People! If your opinion is so incredibly true and powerful, why must you rely on rhetoric to win your argument?
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Molier wrote:
amersfoort wrote:
Now I find your position quite cowardly, it's like you're waiting for the winner and then you'll start cheering for him/her.
Apathy is cowardice!? Oh my.
amersfoort wrote:
I lie, I have stolen and I love to take your lords name in vain, however, you claim not to judge people, yet you do, you judge me as a sinner,
Isn't that your ''lords'' job? And not yours? So just saying that you're right doesn't make you right at this moment. In your post you said you didn't judge people, yet you obviously do.
And you also fail to provide evidence indicating that homosexuality is wrong, you're just another christian saying homosexuality is wrong cause the bible says so, how boring and how empty.
You obviously don't know what a Christian is, Son! What the Bible says is absolute.
papagolfwhiskey wrote:
And for a moment I felt like Diogenes with his lamp who had found the one open minded self-proclaimed Christian. So.. in your mind. the Largest non-catholic group of christians in Canada ... is not christian. Just so I'm clear on this.
Any Christian Church that celebrates homosexual marriage is clearly up for it only for the money, a fool, or a fake Christian.
I'm not even Christian!
LMAO wow a Christian church that conducts weddings for gays? Which country is this?
Everyone is the same in the sence that everyone is equal and has the same sets of rights. So to deny others your privilege is rude and immoral.
However I do agree that a priest should be able to refuse marrying a gay couple, unless of course he is (even partly) financed by the state.
You again fail to notice the handicapped child itself, was it happy it could play tag or was it not? the game didn't change with him joining, so it didn't ''ruin'' it. You might have enjoyed it less, but that is your own personal opinion and thus problem. To deny that child the right to play tag on that base is cruel.
Christian priests shouldn't be offered the option of not marrying a gay couple. They should not be allowed to. Otherwise they aren't entitled to be a Christian priest. Priests are supposed to be representatives of their religion. That is why they are only doing it for the money, or are fake Christians. Since I doubt there is a definition of the word ''christian'' I can safely say that anyone who proclaims to be a christian, is a christian. To say that they are not allowed to cherry pick from their religion is to say that on this day, no true christian exists any more, by my standards a fine statement, however it would make the religion topic even more inconvenient than it already is.
Christian: A person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
A priest is supposed to be a representative of the religion and has to adhere properly to the religion more than anyone else, in order to set an example. It is outrageous that priests celebrate Gay Marriage when it is a Sin according to Christianity.
Should Christian priests celebrate Sins? Yes or No (Please answer directly)
|
6268 cr points
Send Message: 22 / M / The Netherlands
Offline
|
I will not change my approach to this subject unless I feel comfortable with it.
Now since you say a christian is either baptised or a follower of jesus, you also say that the definition of a christian has no correlation with the stand of an individual on homosexuality.
One does not cease to be a christian when being pro-gay, pro-working on sunday or anti-slavery.
A priest should celebrate whatever he/she wants to celebrate (unless it harms others) so my answer would be yes.
|
|
|
Molier wrote:
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide amersfoort wrote:
Molier wrote:
amersfoort wrote:
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide AppIejack wrote:
amersfoort wrote:
AppIejack wrote:
Hah! Being a lesbian myself, I must say the idea of gay marriage is retarded. It's like how back in school, when all of us cool kids would play tag, then the teacher forces us to let the kid with a mental disability play as well. (when he can't even run!)
Make your own game fellas, it's significantly rude to the people that value marriage as a sacred ceremony between man and woman. Don't ruin the game for everyone, just because you want to be included! It pisses me off to see how stupid some gay marriage advocates can be.
Now I find your explanation of the situation and result quite lacking (regarding the game of tag).
Despite the child not being able to run, and thus not being able to fully participate in tag, the child was for a small amount of time, treated normal, and playing with his/her fellow classmates.
Can you not see how happy that might have made the child? This might have not been like that in this specific case, but I can imagine that for others such an event would have brought a lot of happyness. Just because the rest had to get used to it for a second, you deny the child to be happy.
It's significantly rude to deny others the privilege you hold dear, are you really not able to enjoy marriage if gays can marry? Will it make your relation with your man/wife less awesome? If so, then for what reason are you marrying that partner?
Honestly there is no reasonable argument to deny gays their right to marry.
It's significantly rude to deny others the privilege you hold dear?
Really?
Its a privilege to be able to go to the girls bathroom if you're a girl. So that's wrong? Men should be allowed to go too. Wtf? Im simply saying that its stupid how gays want to marry, because marriage does not conform to gays.
"There is no reasonable argument to deny gays their right to marry" - look, my first analogy was simply being realistic. A mentally disabled child who can't run can't play tag with everyone else, simply because it will ruin the game. It doesnt matter if you think "everyone is the same", because it's simply not true.
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Molier wrote:
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Syndicaidramon wrote:
Rest assured. I NEVER insult people for no reason. And like I said, I did not say it with the intention of insulting you. I simply used the insult as a tool to draw comparison with your ignorant way of thinking, to the ignorant nature of the neanderthal.
And no, I didn't. All I saw you do was compare homosexuality to lazy-eye and other ignorant stuff.
The most beliveable reason I saw you make is that accepting homosexuality would make it more common. Which is a really stupid reason.
Prisons are a lousy argument against it, because the conditions in prison are totally different from the conditions in the outside world.
As for the identity crisis argument... well that doesn't hold water either.
Gender roles are already starting to blur because of our modernized society. The time where men had to be big and strong, and had to take care of his family because the woman is too weak to make it on her own is long gone. Women aren't weak anymore. And because of that, in addition to the advancements in technology, that old ideal of how men should be no longer serves any practical purpose.
Your argument of this being a bad thing only works in a world where people have no ability to establish an identity for themselves. A world where conformity is the only way to do so. But that is not true. People are perfectly capable of establishing their own identities without having to conform to gender roles or stereotypes. And not being burdened or pressured into conformity is a good thing.
That doesn't mean the big, strong man will die out. We still have ideals of how a man should look http://munfitnessblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/ryan-reynolds-toned-body.jpg and for how a woman should look http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9jELGhDpjuA/TCiF6OOL97I/AAAAAAAAA-Y/IqfFscZxrO8/s1600/ideal-body.jp. So those archetypes won't die out anyway. Besides, sometimes you still need "a man" to do the heavy lifting, simply because they have a natural bigger upper body strength than woman.
What it means is just that people can be whoever they choose to be without being prosecuted, discriminated against or bullied for being who they are.
Gender biases are a bad thing and must be removed. And they are getting removed naturally, by the progress of society. Not by homosexuality.
Besides, I don't know if you are aware of this, but most hardcore gay men like burly, muscular, manly men. So that's another thing that makes your argument useless.
And I know I focused most on the male part of this, but hey... those are the gender roles that are being removed the most.
How you think that acceptance of homosexuals will lead to MORE bullying, I cannot possibly imagine.
Not accepting something will ALWAYS lead to bullying. If if people didn't look at homosexuals with the attitude that "it is wrong", homosexuals wouldn't be discriminated against or bullied.
And that is why acceptance for homosexuality is necessary. Because you shouldn't discriminate or bully someone for being who they are.
It is not about promoting homosexuality. It's just about accepting that some people are homosexuals, and that we shouldn't prosecute or discriminate against them for that.
It is just about acceptance, and only that.
Just like how I accept that people can smoke tobacco if they want to. Just because my friend smokes tobacco, doesn't mean I will.
And homosexuality is not comparable to pedophilia. Sexual activity with children is NOT the same as sexual activity between two grown and mature adults.
So don't even try to use that argument. And no, I didn't. All I saw you do was compare homosexuality to lazy-eye and other ignorant stuff.The most beliveable reason I saw you make is that accepting homosexuality would make it more common. Which is a really stupid reason.Prisons are a lousy argument against it, because the conditions in prison are totally different from the conditions in the outside world.
What an UNRELATED refutation to whatever she was implying!
As for the identity crisis argument... well that doesn't hold water either.
Gender roles are already starting to blur because of our modernized society. The time where men had to be big and strong, and had to take care of his family because the woman is too weak to make it on her own is long gone. Women aren't weak anymore. And because of that, in addition to the advancements in technology, that old ideal of how men should be no longer serves any practical purpose.
Your argument of this being a bad thing only works in a world where people have no ability to establish an identity for themselves. A world where conformity is the only way to do so. But that is not true. People are perfectly capable of establishing their own identities without having to conform to gender roles or stereotypes. And not being burdened or pressured into conformity is a good thing. Besides, I don't know if you are aware of this, but most hardcore gay men like burly, muscular, manly men. So that's another thing that makes your argument useless.
And I know I focused most on the male part of this, but hey... those are the gender roles that are being removed the most. How you think that acceptance of homosexuals will lead to MORE bullying, I cannot possibly imagine.
Not accepting something will ALWAYS lead to bullying. If if people didn't look at homosexuals with the attitude that "it is wrong", homosexuals wouldn't be discriminated against or bullied.
And that is why acceptance for homosexuality is necessary. Because you shouldn't discriminate or bully someone for being who they are. It is not about promoting homosexuality. It's just about accepting that some people are homosexuals, and that we shouldn't prosecute or discriminate against them for that.
It is just about acceptance, and only that.
Just like how I accept that people can smoke tobacco if they want to. Just because my friend smokes tobacco, doesn't mean I will.And homosexuality is not comparable to pedophilia. Sexual activity with children is NOT the same as sexual activity between two grown and mature adults.
So don't even try to use that argument.
People! If your opinion is so incredibly true and powerful, why must you rely on rhetoric to win your argument?
Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Molier wrote:
amersfoort wrote:
Now I find your position quite cowardly, it's like you're waiting for the winner and then you'll start cheering for him/her.
Apathy is cowardice!? Oh my.
amersfoort wrote:
I lie, I have stolen and I love to take your lords name in vain, however, you claim not to judge people, yet you do, you judge me as a sinner,
Isn't that your ''lords'' job? And not yours? So just saying that you're right doesn't make you right at this moment. In your post you said you didn't judge people, yet you obviously do.
And you also fail to provide evidence indicating that homosexuality is wrong, you're just another christian saying homosexuality is wrong cause the bible says so, how boring and how empty.
You obviously don't know what a Christian is, Son! What the Bible says is absolute.
papagolfwhiskey wrote:
And for a moment I felt like Diogenes with his lamp who had found the one open minded self-proclaimed Christian. So.. in your mind. the Largest non-catholic group of christians in Canada ... is not christian. Just so I'm clear on this.
Any Christian Church that celebrates homosexual marriage is clearly up for it only for the money, a fool, or a fake Christian.
I'm not even Christian!
LMAO wow a Christian church that conducts weddings for gays? Which country is this?
Everyone is the same in the sence that everyone is equal and has the same sets of rights. So to deny others your privilege is rude and immoral.
However I do agree that a priest should be able to refuse marrying a gay couple, unless of course he is (even partly) financed by the state.
You again fail to notice the handicapped child itself, was it happy it could play tag or was it not? the game didn't change with him joining, so it didn't ''ruin'' it. You might have enjoyed it less, but that is your own personal opinion and thus problem. To deny that child the right to play tag on that base is cruel.
Christian priests shouldn't be offered the option of not marrying a gay couple. They should not be allowed to. Otherwise they aren't entitled to be a Christian priest. Priests are supposed to be representatives of their religion. That is why they are only doing it for the money, or are fake Christians. Since I doubt there is a definition of the word ''christian'' I can safely say that anyone who proclaims to be a christian, is a christian. To say that they are not allowed to cherry pick from their religion is to say that on this day, no true christian exists any more, by my standards a fine statement, however it would make the religion topic even more inconvenient than it already is.
Please don't make this discussion slower than it needs to be. You know what a Christian is.
Christian: A person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Jesus Christ and his teachings.
A priest is supposed to be a representative of the religion and has to adhere properly to the religion more than anyone else, in order to set an example. It is outrageous that priests celebrate Gay Marriage when it is a Sin according to Christianity.
Should Christian priests celebrate Sins? Yes or No (Please answer directly) You're hijacking the "Gay marriage" thread with your own irrelevant bias towards fundamental Christian dogmas. That's how you're ruining this secular debate completely out of context.
Furthermore, you as a self-proclaimed non-christian, are being disrespectful towards liberal Christian value of how God's love is for everyone. It's therefore arrogant and hateful of yourself passing judgment onto someone more sociable and compassionate than you.
|
Post Reply
Gay Marriage 
Follow us on Google+ 
