quote:

Originally posted by Jenos:

quote:

You know what? Even if they were born as such, which I don't agree with, so are schizophrenics. Let's let the schizos marry their "voices"

Are you saying schizophrenics are not born that way?

If not, your wording made it appear so. I was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, and I can honestly tell you I did not choose to be that way. If I had a choice, I would rather not.

You do know that 'schizo' is a derogatory term, yes? I take offense to that. And I would like to know what you mean by 'schizos' wanting to marry their 'voices.'

Actually, I was saying that schizophrenics are born that way, as opposed to homosexuals, who are not.

I actually didn't know it was a derrogatory term, I was just short-handing because it's a long word.

I was saying, we don't support mental disabilities, so why should we support this one?

quote:

Because marriage is a sacred bond, not something to be tossed around so lightly.

That is simply your opinion. You have that opinion because you are religious. My parents are not religious. They are both married. Is their marriage not valid?

You are a mormon, correct. Don't some mormon have multiple wives? What is so sacred about that?

quote:

You know what? Even if they were born as such, which I don't agree with, so are schizophrenics. Let's let the schizos marry their "voices"

You have to marry a fellow human being, not a voice. Duh.

Okay, we have established that you find gay-marriage wrong. That's fine. You are free to have that opinion. But why should millions of homosexuals be denied the right to marry because you find the idea offensive?

quote:

You know what? Even if they were born as such, which I don't agree with, so are schizophrenics. Let's let the schizos marry their "voices"

Are you saying schizophrenics are not born that way?

If not, your wording made it appear so. I was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, and I can honestly tell you I did not choose to be that way. If I had a choice, I would rather not.

You do know that 'schizo' is a derogatory term, yes? I take offense to that. And I would like to know what you mean by 'schizos' wanting to marry their 'voices.'

quote:

Originally posted by bluedemocrat:

quote:

The word marriage means a bond between a man and a woman, and yes, it does degrade the word.

How?

Because marriage is a sacred bond, not something to be tossed around so lightly.

quote:

Originally posted by WorthWaitingFor:
If you are Christian, Homosexuality is not a sin. The Bible does not say it's wrong. People have been homosexual probably back near the time of Adam and Eve but just didn't call it that. If you wish to follow Levite law in regards to this, please don't discriminate and kindly follow the rest of those laws.

Oh yeah? Try re-reading Romans 1.

quote:

And please remember that if you still insist that homosexuality is somehow against Christianity/the Bible/God that the entire country of America is not Christian and therefore shouldn't have to follow Christian law.

I recognize this, however, I cannot accept their marriage with a clear conscience, and what they want is for me to accept their marriage, and they cannot force me to do so.
FOR GOODNESS SAKES! Even before this big huge argument started they were getting married. The Unitarians and the Liberal Reform Jews have already been marrying them for quite some time.

quote:

You would never say that heterosexuals aren't born as such so why would you say that homosexuals aren't born as such?

You know what? Even if they were born as such, which I don't agree with, so are schizophrenics. Let's let the schizos marry their "voices"

quote:

The sanctity of marriage issue: Please. If marriage was still that sacred, then please stop the heterosexual marriages occurring in Vegas.

I do find it degrading to marriage. I wish we would get rid of them, I've tried to make some voice with that, but it's somewhat hard when you live in Seattle.

quote:

It's kind of funny taint isn't censored.

Heheh, I know.

-----"""LIARS who should be punched in the taint."""---

LOL EarthGoddess.

It's kind of funny taint isn't censored.

quote:

They aren't born homosexual. They chose to be so.

My best friend used to receive death threats on a daily basis when he lived in a town in Nevada whose population was mostly Mormon. Which is why his parents had to send him back up here to Alaska.

Why would he go through all the trouble? If I were him, and sexuality actually was a choice, I'd go heterosexual immediately after the first threat. But in reality, people who try to change their sexuality have a failure rate of 99.9%. And all those "Ex-gays" out there are LIARS who should be punched in the taint.

Choosing your sexuality and actually enjoying it, is impossible. I dare you to look at a woman and choose to be sexually attracted to her. I tried it. There was this really cute bisexual girl at my school once, and when I saw her I thought I was bi for a sec, then realized I couldn't see myself actually being intimate with another girl. I watched some lesbian porn once, and I just didn't like it and I couldn't force myself to like it. Therefore, it's not a choice. You're either attracted to the opposite sex or you're not. That's all there is to it. That's how nature is. It contains lots of "abnormal" stuff, and humans are not above these abnormalities.

quote:

They aren't born homosexual. They chose to be so.

There have been countless scientific observations that have pointed towards the "homosexuality gene." Honestly, why would anyone choose to be homosexual with the way Americans treat them today?

quote:

The word marriage means a bond between a man and a woman, and yes, it does degrade the word.

What makes the word seem degraded? It is but a word, and if anything, it makes the word (not to mention our country) more admirable. Who likes a word that's discriminatory? Not me. . .

quote:

They aren't born homosexual. They chose to be so.

Was my reasoning not logical enough for you? Let me use a long-winded analogy (duck and cover folks):

Let's say all blonde-haired people are "second-class". Now, we all know hair color can be easily changed, but dye doesn't change our true hair color, our natural color. So, even though blonde-haired people are harassed, not allowed to marry, and overall degraded for their blondness, they are still blonde. You'd think that if they were able to choose their hair color, they'd change to brown, or red, or some other "decent" color. But, they can't choose their hair color. They're born with it.

That was probably a poor analogy, but the reasoning behind it still stands: if homosexuals are harassed so much, why would they ever in their right minds choose to be such?

Did you wake up one morning and think to yourself, "Hmm, I think I'll like people of the opposite sex"? I sure didn't. I just happen to like girls as opposed to guys. Why? I don't know why. But I can tell you that I didn't choose. And if you asked me to become a homosexual, I doubt if I'd be able to.

Likewise, you're not going to easily get homosexuals to become "normal". Sure, you can force it, and perhaps even fool them into thinking you've "helped" them, but it doesn't change the fact that they are still, regardless of what you think and say, homosexual.

Of course, I admit that logic is not proof in any way, but it's more than what you "homosexuality is a choice" people have got.

::CRIES::

I missed it...all of it. Stupid busy life.

Ahem. I'll just state a few of my general opinions/facts that have to do with the direction this argument has taken.

If you are Christian, Homosexuality is not a sin. The Bible does not say it's wrong. People have been homosexual probably back near the time of Adam and Eve but just didn't call it that. If you wish to follow Levite law in regards to this, please don't discriminate and kindly follow the rest of those laws.

And please remember that if you still insist that homosexuality is somehow against Christianity/the Bible/God that the entire country of America is not Christian and therefore shouldn't have to follow Christian law.

You would never say that heterosexuals aren't born as such so why would you say that homosexuals aren't born as such?

The sanctity of marriage issue: Please. If marriage was still that sacred, then please stop the heterosexual marriages occurring in Vegas.

I don't know what else to say. What possible other argument could someone have???

quote:

They aren't born homosexual. They chose to be so.

Prove it.

quote:

The word marriage means a bond between a man and a woman, and yes, it does degrade the word.

How?

They aren't born homosexual. They chose to be so.

The word marriage means a bond between a man and a woman, and yes, it does degrade the word.

But if your fine with their being born homosexual, then shouldn't it matter not whether they marry or not? It isn't like it degrades the quality of the word or the thing itself. Marraige is marriage is marriage. It will not change the children. I mean, if anything, it will teach them to be tolerant, accepting, and all-loving, something Christianity (as all religions do) preaches.

quote:

Originally posted by ICELAND:
Hubbabaloo, I hope you realize that this whole argument about if the Bible condemns homosexuality isn't even relevant when you consider that there are many Americans who aren't Christian, and therefore should not have to follow what's written in the Bible. Demanding they follow the rules of your religion when they aren't even Christian is ridiculous. If you want to follow the writings of a book that has gone through hundreds of translations and re-writings, even in the past few hundred years, go ahead, but no one else should be required to follow the rules of YOUR religion.

I'm completely fine with them wanting to be homosexual, I'm just fighting them redefining the word marriage and such.

Yes! Controversy. All my points have been covered. Maldición. . .

I hope my Spanish class has taught me something. Hm.

Hubbabaloo, I hope you realize that this whole argument about if the Bible condemns homosexuality isn't even relevant when you consider that there are many Americans who aren't Christian, and therefore should not have to follow what's written in the Bible. Demanding they follow the rules of your religion when they aren't even Christian is ridiculous. If you want to follow the writings of a book that has gone through hundreds of translations and re-writings, even in the past few hundred years, go ahead, but no one else should be required to follow the rules of YOUR religion.

quote:

If you say Romans is obsolete, it stands to reason, that the rest of the Bible is out the window.

Considering the newest bit of Ye Olde Bible was written over a millenium ago, I'd say it's a tad obsolete. Face it, the Bible isn't needed. I don't follow it, yet I still find that being kind to others is beneficial to all concerned.

Just remember, you don't need to be religious or believe in a god to be a good person.

I just find it rather peculiar that we can declare the parts of the "word of God" that we desire obsolete at our own will.

I know that there are some things in there that today would seem insane to us, but they were made obosolete by Christ's sacrifice, and if you look back at it, a lot of those things, because of the unsanitary conditions of the time were good things. However, those were the Mosaic Law. I was simply using it as another example of when God is against homosexuality.

ROMANS however. You cannot say that Romans is obsolete. If you say Romans is obsolete, it stands to reason, that the rest of the Bible is out the window. There's no reason that that should be obsolete, without "love one another" be obsolete.