These iceholes have violated others fargen rights!

[ram57ta]

My views on "THE" Bible...if there is such a thing anymore since there are like 20 gazillion different bibles that have different teachings and meanings depending on the day of the week and who is interpreting it...would probably reflect an Athiest viewpoint. I can't stand organized religion anymore. They all want to preach THEIR views and opinions while at the same time....not practicing what they preach. IMHO organized religion is a huge crock of shit that for the most part is self serving for those who make huge profits from it. I think every person on this planet short of a few mentally disabled people know and understand the difference between right and wrong. There are too many documented cases in EVERY church and religion where high ranking church officials have stolen money, raped or murdered children and women, and have covered up and hidden information that might reveal just how corrupt and immoral they are.

[Forever_frost]

Those are shitty for whole different reasons. You're not focusing on the subject at hand, and still bringing up issues that don't relate to it. Keep trying.

Actually I am very focused (well, was when I started and medication is kicking in). If you believe government can say marriage is defined as XYZ and allow them to license it, you must accept their decision.

Otherwise, take that power from them and return it to the individuals.

[racrguy]

[slow99]

Well, if we let "the gays" get married, next thing you know the damned zombies will be demanding it as well.

[racrguy]

Well, if we let "the gays" get married, next thing you know the damned zombies will be demanding it as well.

We can't be having those zombies getting married. Society as we know it will come to an end!

[jluv]

The notion that marriage is a religious institution is flawed. People in tribes got married long before religion reached them. All kinds of people get married these days who have zero religion in their lives. Religious people (especially Christians) just want to lay claim to everything they see fit. It's ridiculous.

[03WhiteGT]

Stupid

[slow06]

I know this is entirely satirical, but I do agree with #3 to a much lesser extent. I would agree that allowing gay marriage could be a stepping stone to other situations, possibly polygamy? Ignoring my thoughts about it personally, on first thought it seems like allowing homosexuals to marry could open the door to allowing polygamy.

My problem with the entire argument is the idea that Christians want to fight for their religion in the political arena. I'm not a bible scholar by any means, but when I think back to what I know about the life of Jesus I don't see a man who lobbied politicians to get his ideas put into place. I don't see a man that "attacked" people, or pursued legislation against those who believed differently than him.

What I do see is a man who lived his life according to his fathers will. He talked about it, and appealed to individuals to believe in him/his father in a caring and loving way and to live their life according to his will

Perhaps the most famous verse in the Bible is John 3:16, but have you ever heard John 3:17?

For God did not come into the world to condemn the world, but that the world, through him, might be saved.

His whole point was to save, not to condemn. Christians shouldn't be out condemning this behavior (IMO voting against it) or berating homosexuals. For the most part they get it, Christians say their lifestyle is wrong. What about loving them, and trying to save them?

This country is not set up to have laws based on religion, it just isn't. Christians may think they want it while they are the majority, but as soon as they aren't they will realize why it is a bad idea.

It is up to me to teach my family and kids the values that I agree with, not any government. The government can allow whatever they choose morally, it doesn't mean I have to do it or allow my children to. It is my job to live within the bounds of what I believe, not to make the world live along those same guidelines.

I do believe that the bible teaches the homosexuality is a sin, and likewise their marriage is not acceptable. However my approach to affect people's lives in a positive way won't be legislation in any manner, but certainly not legislation against them.

Politically I think think marriage is merely a tax break and cheaper insurance (I know there are a few more things like POA). In that respect it is a privilege, not a right. Why wouldn't you give it to homosexuals, I don't really know. I can see an argument being made that it is not fair or equitable for them to not receive the same benefits, but I don't see how they are entitled to it. They still have freedom. Freedom to live their life, love each other ect, they just do not receive the monetary benefit.

[racrguy]

I know this is entirely satirical, but I do agree with #3 to a much lesser extent. I would agree that allowing gay marriage could be a stepping stone to other situations, possibly polygamy? Ignoring my thoughts about it personally, on first thought it seems like allowing homosexuals to marry could open the door to allowing polygamy.

Where's the problem with polygamy? Does someone marrying more than one person affect you that much? Really?

[jluv]

Where's the problem with polygamy? Does someone marrying more than one person affect you that much? Really?

I agree.

[Treasure Chest]

Where's the problem with polygamy? Does someone marrying more than one person affect you that much? Really?

I agree.

I still don't understand why any sane man would want to take on more than one crazy female. If he's up for the challenge, more power to him.

[Sean88gt]

I think the bigger issue is Mexicans breeding. Need to cut that shit out.

[Forever_frost]

I know this is entirely satirical, but I do agree with #3 to a much lesser extent. I would agree that allowing gay marriage could be a stepping stone to other situations, possibly polygamy? Ignoring my thoughts about it personally, on first thought it seems like allowing homosexuals to marry could open the door to allowing polygamy.

My problem with the entire argument is the idea that Christians want to fight for their religion in the political arena. I'm not a bible scholar by any means, but when I think back to what I know about the life of Jesus I don't see a man who lobbied politicians to get his ideas put into place. I don't see a man that "attacked" people, or pursued legislation against those who believed differently than him.

What I do see is a man who lived his life according to his fathers will. He talked about it, and appealed to individuals to believe in him/his father in a caring and loving way and to live their life according to his will

Perhaps the most famous verse in the Bible is John 3:16, but have you ever heard John 3:17?



His whole point was to save, not to condemn. Christians shouldn't be out condemning this behavior (IMO voting against it) or berating homosexuals. For the most part they get it, Christians say their lifestyle is wrong. What about loving them, and trying to save them?

This country is not set up to have laws based on religion, it just isn't. Christians may think they want it while they are the majority, but as soon as they aren't they will realize why it is a bad idea.

It is up to me to teach my family and kids the values that I agree with, not any government. The government can allow whatever they choose morally, it doesn't mean I have to do it or allow my children to. It is my job to live within the bounds of what I believe, not to make the world live along those same guidelines.

I do believe that the bible teaches the homosexuality is a sin, and likewise their marriage is not acceptable. However my approach to affect people's lives in a positive way won't be legislation in any manner, but certainly not legislation against them.

Politically I think think marriage is merely a tax break and cheaper insurance (I know there are a few more things like POA). In that respect it is a privilege, not a right. Why wouldn't you give it to homosexuals, I don't really know. I can see an argument being made that it is not fair or equitable for them to not receive the same benefits, but I don't see how they are entitled to it. They still have freedom. Freedom to live their life, love each other ect, they just do not receive the monetary benefit.

Just saying:

"Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."
Charles Carroll, signer of the Declaration of Independence

"It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains."
Patrick Henry

It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here."
Patrick Henry

"Bad men cannot make good citizens. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience are incompatible with freedom."
Patrick Henry

It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.
George Washington

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
John Adams

[slow06]

Where's the problem with polygamy? Does someone marrying more than one person affect you that much? Really?

I think you are reading too much into what I said. It was just a thought, not an attack.

I get the impression polygamy is less socially acceptable than homosexuality, therefore people would be much less outspoken about legalizing it. I see the reasoning behind legalizing them being the same, I am just curious if people would be as supportive.

To answer your question though, It doesn't effect me any differently than homosexuals marrying. I wasn't implying that it did, I would hold essentially the same position.

Just saying:

"Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."
Charles Carroll, signer of the Declaration of Independence

"It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains."
Patrick Henry

It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here."
Patrick Henry

"Bad men cannot make good citizens. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience are incompatible with freedom."
Patrick Henry

It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.
George Washington

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
John Adams

I'm with you to a point frost. I agree that morals are good, even necessary. I can say that I fully believe this country would be better off if we had a more solid set of shared morals.

The problem I have is the government telling me what those morals should be. I don't have enough faith in them to do that well.

[Forever_frost]

I think you are reading too much into what I said. It was just a thought, not an attack.

I get the impression polygamy is less socially acceptable than homosexuality, therefore people would be much less outspoken about legalizing it. I see the reasoning behind legalizing them being the same, I am just curious if people would be as supportive.

To answer your question though, It doesn't effect me any differently than homosexuals marrying. I wasn't implying that it did, I would hold essentially the same position.


I'm with you to a point frost. I agree that morals are good, even necessary. I can say that I fully believe this country would be better off if we had a more solid set of shared morals.

The problem I have is the government telling me what those morals should be. I don't have enough faith in them to do that well.

I can't say it enough so I'll do it again. I'm not for government having ANY say over who can and can't get married. Not state, not federal, not local. None. If you want to enter into that partnership, you should be able to. It should NOT be a governmental power at any level.