Gay Marriage Legal in New York!

[Ravenheart]

Also Durg, there are billions and billions of Christians. You're never ever going to be in the minority, you're just very very very slowly losing the ability to impose your will on other people who don't agree with you.

[zxlkho]

MY GOD IS BETTER THAN YOUR GOD
THEREFORE I'M BETTER THAN YOU

[Adami]

MY GOD IS BETTER THAN YOUR GOD
THEREFORE I'M BETTER THAN YOU

I'm not sure if you're quoting a song, but those comments are extremely unhelpful.

[Ħ]

As a Christian, I do believe that the Bible teaches that homosexuality is a sin.  However, I don't know if sin should be illegal, or if I should vote in accordance with making sin illegal, because we are all sinners and would obviously all be in jail if the government followed God's law.  

So it's a complicated issue for me.  On one side, I think homosexuality is immoral, but on the other side, I don't know if the government should (or can) follow God's law.  I can't think of any Biblical teaching on how a government ought to be run, and my political views are very underdeveloped, so I am undecided as to where I stand.

[zxlkho]

MY GOD IS BETTER THAN YOUR GOD
THEREFORE I'M BETTER THAN YOU

I'm not sure if you're quoting a song, but those comments are extremely unhelpful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TZWhri2GRM

[Quadrochosis]

we are all sinners and would obviously all be in jail if the government followed God's law.

This is the best post I've read in this thread so far. Really well said.

[the Catfishman]

Morality is an ever moving target.  If a society doesn't have something like the Bible to help figure out what is moral than what do we have?  Only one man's opinion verses another.  The Bible is now rejected in our country so we're left with deciding what morality is by majority rules.

Lol, you do realise that the same reasoning is used in conservative Islamic countries to stone woman to death because they were raped.

[Heaven Outcry Angel]

then they are pyschological issues brought on by them desiring to be/indentifying more with the opposite gender, NOT "being born in the wrong body". That isnt how reality works, sorry.

So transgender people are psychologically impure. I'm so glad we live in such a tolerant, accepting Christian world.

I dont know, you say "impure" like you imply I look down on them so your probably just putting words in my mouth (again) to make a strawman out of me. You also automatically assume Im christian, or that most people like this are christian.... wow man, i think you should learn how to argue correctly instead of making generalisations and veiled insults. I dont think any less of these people at all, I think its a little wierd and disgusting but if they want to be the opposite gender thats there choice I guess, just dont give me this "born in the wrong body" crap. I didnt want to be born short and with a tiny penis and would rather have an african american mans genitals but that wasnot my choice, doesnt mean Im in the wrong body.

[Quadrochosis]

I dont think any less of these people at all

its disgusting dont give me this "born in the wrong body" crap.

ok

[King Postwhore]

I say good for them and I bet all the lawyers are saying it too.  A new avenue for divorces and more money for lawyers.

[Heaven Outcry Angel]

Your twisting my words around and  taking them out of context, i had some thought out points before but now its just an insult. What I meant is i find it gross, like someone else might find bukkake or tentacle hentai or zoophines gross, but that doesnt mean its morally wrong.

[Quadrochosis]

I like bukkake, but that doesnt mean its morally wrong.

There you go.

[Ħ]

I think the disagreement here is rooted in a misunderstanding of each other's vocabulary.  Gender can be a reference to biological physical makeup, or a reference to how one identifies themselves.  The first is objectively fixed, and the second is rooted in subjectivity and personal preference.

[Quadrochosis]

I think the disagreement here is rooted in a misunderstanding of each other's vocabulary.  Gender can be a reference to biological physical makeup, or a reference to how one identifies themselves.  The first is objectively fixed, and the second is rooted in subjectivity and personal preference.

I'd even disagree with that, but it's a better ground to start with than what most people in this thread were implying.

[Heaven Outcry Angel]

I give up, seems common sense and etiqutte dont exist here

[tjanuranus]

Man i wish someone gay would chime in here... oh well.

[tjanuranus]

If i here ONE MORE THING ABOUT the poor christians and how they are losing control blah blah...

[bosk1]

Dude, Durg, your entire post toward what I said can be summed up, "Yeah, discrimination is wrong, but I do it. I'm a hypocrite. Suck it."

73109, you've been warned before about doing things like baiting people by intentionally misstating what they have said.  You can disagree all you like, but knock off the confrontational b.s. or you'll be banned from P/R (or worse) permanently.

your god wants you to be tollerant of others

 Where on earth would you get this idea?  That is about as unbiblical as you can get.

[bosk1]

Man i wish someone gay would chime in here... oh well.

That would actually be really cool.  We might actually be able to have some intelligent discussion instead of fake moral outrage by people who have no stake in what is being discussed.

[Heaven Outcry Angel]

fake moral outrage by people who have no stake in what is being discussed.

Isnt that what your first post in this thread is?

[bosk1]

No.  And since you can't seem to stick to the topic (whether in the DT section, general discussion, or here) and would rather bait and attack others, consider this your final warning on the subject as well.

[Heaven Outcry Angel]

Ok well can I ask how you have more stake in what is being discussed than they do?? I mean for the most part I side with you more than them, I dont like it, but I dont see how it effects us and how we have more of a right or w/e to talk about it unless you just dont want them disagreing with you. Im not sure what your getting at

[tjanuranus]

Animals can't consent to marriage.

You totally missed my point.   

You used the old "Gay marriage can lead to interspecies marriage" argument based on the logic that if the line isn't drawn somewhere, it's drawn no where.

Nope.  Not my point at all.

Oh I apologize, what was the point then?

Society's idea of what is moral is continually sliding as Bosk1 said.  I took a ridiculously immoral idea and gave an example of how it can become a "moral" idea over time.

You can't even show a nipple without people wanting to burn down buildings in this country. This country is so repressed it's ridiculous. Just because people are becoming more human by NOT infringing on other peoples happiness now doesn't mean morality is going out the window.

Yeah.  We're so repressed.  ::rollseyes::  Tell that to the people of Sudan or Iran.  People infringe on others happiness all the time.  It doesn't mean we're sooo repressed.  We live in a great, free country.  It's not perfect but it is great.  If gays want to get married in New York then fine.  Let's just make sure that we don't repress the people that believe that a homosexual lifestyle is immoral.

I would argue not being selfish is a lot more moral than being selfish.

Agreed.  However, I don't see how that applies.

There is a big difference between Opressed and repressed. We are not Opressed but very repressed as a nation.

[King Postwhore]

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't The Ugliest Unicorn in his thread about unwanted advances state that he was gay?  Maybe someone should PM him on his opinion.

[bosk1]

Ok well can I ask how you have more stake in what is being discussed than they do?? I mean for the most part I side with you more than them, I dont like it, but I dont see how it effects us and how we have more of a right or w/e to talk about it unless you just dont want them disagreing with you. Im not sure what your getting at

I'm not saying I have more of a stake in what is being discussed, other than the fact that the point *I* brought up is the collective, public morality of the country, which I care about.  But my point is that there is no moral outrage in my post whatsoever.  Bummer for New York.  Bummer for the nation as a whole.  But, okay, I'll go on living my life now rather than rage at people on the Internet and act like the world is coming to an end just because someone thinks differently than me.  I briefly said my piece (i.e., that things like this bum me out), and that's pretty much it.  Ready to move on.

[Ravenheart]

I could love my dog so much that I decide that I want to marry it. 

What if enough people who love their dogs and want to marry them can rally together and demand that they are being discriminated against.  Then all kinds of influential people like Lady Ga Ga and Stephen Speilberg can insist that there's an injustice going on in our country.  So for years, even decades, we get bombarded with messages from all forms of media (TV, Movies, Music) that the people who want to marry dogs are just as normal as you and me they just were born attracted to dogs rather than humans.  Endless arguments never cease with people claiming that human dog love has been going on since the beginning of time.  Finally, after many years of discrimination, New York passes a law that makes marrying dogs legal.  Everyone declares that it's about time and when people that were not in agreement with the human dog lifestyle say it's another slide to immorality, everyone will say things like, "so marrying the dog you love is immoral?  Hmmmft!

I'm sorry, but this is by far the most absurd, throwaway "what if" scenario I've ever read.

[bosk1]

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't The Ugliest Unicorn in his thread about unwanted advances state that he was gay?  Maybe someone should PM him on his opinion.

Dunno.  I don't remember that thread.  It's interesting though that the people on the board who are gay or bi generally don't post in these threads.  I think Jackie might have once as I recall, but I seem to recall that she just felt it was too emotional and she felt like it was just better to not bother than to get carried away.

[Heaven Outcry Angel]

Ok well can I ask how you have more stake in what is being discussed than they do?? I mean for the most part I side with you more than them, I dont like it, but I dont see how it effects us and how we have more of a right or w/e to talk about it unless you just dont want them disagreing with you. Im not sure what your getting at

I'm not saying I have more of a stake in what is being discussed, other than the fact that the point *I* brought up is the collective, public morality of the country, which I care about.  But my point is that there is no moral outrage in my post whatsoever.  Bummer for New York.  Bummer for the nation as a whole.  But, okay, I'll go on living my life now rather than rage at people on the Internet and act like the world is coming to an end just because someone thinks differently than me.

fair enough, thank you, Ill step out of this thread

[ZBomber]

Ok well can I ask how you have more stake in what is being discussed than they do?? I mean for the most part I side with you more than them, I dont like it, but I dont see how it effects us and how we have more of a right or w/e to talk about it unless you just dont want them disagreing with you. Im not sure what your getting at

I'm not saying I have more of a stake in what is being discussed, other than the fact that the point *I* brought up is the collective, public morality of the country, which I care about.  

And others are voicing their opinion on the fact that many us of view this as a positive step for our country, which WE care about. I don't see any reason why that should be stopped now.


And lol at people trying to claim Christianity as a minority/at risk of becoming one. That is one of the most far out statements I have heard.

[bosk1]

Ok well can I ask how you have more stake in what is being discussed than they do?? I mean for the most part I side with you more than them, I dont like it, but I dont see how it effects us and how we have more of a right or w/e to talk about it unless you just dont want them disagreing with you. Im not sure what your getting at

I'm not saying I have more of a stake in what is being discussed, other than the fact that the point *I* brought up is the collective, public morality of the country, which I care about. 

And others are voicing their opinion on the fact that many us of view this as a positive step for our country, which WE care about. I don't see any reason why that should be stopped now.

  Who said it should stop?  That's perfectly fine.

[ZBomber]

Ok well can I ask how you have more stake in what is being discussed than they do?? I mean for the most part I side with you more than them, I dont like it, but I dont see how it effects us and how we have more of a right or w/e to talk about it unless you just dont want them disagreing with you. Im not sure what your getting at

I'm not saying I have more of a stake in what is being discussed, other than the fact that the point *I* brought up is the collective, public morality of the country, which I care about.  

And others are voicing their opinion on the fact that many us of view this as a positive step for our country, which WE care about. I don't see any reason why that should be stopped now.

 Who said it should stop?  That's perfectly fine.

I didn't mean you said it should stop, I just am not sure why it is "fake moral outage". I don't think anyone is faking anything, as these discussions are usually pretty honest in terms of how someone feels about something. Just like you feel the morality of the country is slipping, people are actually very upset at the idea that others think it's OK to NOT grant people the ability to marry someone of their own sex.

I also don't see how a gay person chiming in would make this anymore intelligent. It would probably be just as pointless because no one is going to change their opinions anyways, and things would get even moire personal and heated.

[rumborak]

I always thought Matthew 7:3 and John 8:7 were rather relevant in this whole gay marriage discussion. Do people really find themselves in such moral superiority that they can start imposing theirs on others?

rumborak

[ClairvoyantCat]

To try and draw the subject back from getting as personal as it seems to be getting, I'm a bit curious as to the use of the term "immoral" to describe homosexuality, as I've seen it from multiple posters in this thread.  I don't mean to come off as abrasive, but I've not seen better reasoning against it than the fact that it's "in the bible."  I'd be interested seeing this point articulated by someone who has expressed it, just for clarity on whether it is strictly an "against the bible" thing or an actual immoral ground that you believe is being crossed.  And I'd rather not hear that it's "just...unnatural."

[Ravenheart]

To try and draw the subject back from getting as personal as it seems to be getting, I'm a bit curious as to the use of the term "immoral" to describe homosexuality, as I've seen it from multiple posters in this thread.  I don't mean to come off as abrasive, but I've not seen better reasoning against it than the fact that it's "in the bible."  I'd be interested seeing this point articulated by someone who has expressed it, just for clarity on whether it is strictly an "against the bible" thing or an actual immoral ground that you believe is being crossed.  And I'd rather not hear that it's "just...unnatural."

Because the children or something.

[Perpetual Change]

I always thought Matthew 7:3 and John 8:7 were rather relevant in this whole gay marriage discussion. Do people really find themselves in such moral superiority that they can start imposing theirs on others?

rumborak

Sadly, Yes.

Good for New York.