Gay Marriage - An Academic Take

[doobnVA]

Instead of specific insults and names, how about if we just use "shpadoinkle" as a substitute? That way, noone gets their wittle feelings hurted, AND at the same time it'll be fun for all of us to speculate as to what shpadoinkle is substituting for (while assuring the thread remains open!)

It's a win/win...

 

[fdd2blk]

Instead of specific insults and names, how about if we just use "shpadoinkle" as a substitute? That way, noone gets their wittle feelings hurted, AND at the same time it'll be fun for all of us to speculate as to what shpadoinkle is substituting for (while assuring the thread remains open!)

It's a win/win...

it's not about feelings getting hurt, it's about having enough intelligence to come up with something OTHER THAN AN INSULT.

though i understand some of you have nothing more, but the name calling.

 

[Green Cross]

it's not about feelings getting hurt, it's about having enough intelligence to come up with something OTHER THAN AN INSULT.

though i understand some of you have nothing more, but the name calling.

At the risk of throwing my pearls (of wisdom - all of which comes from God - because mans wisdom is foolishness) before swine (Biblical speaking)

"What Does the Bible Really Say About Homosexuality?
Genesis 2:18-25 says, "And the Lord God said, "It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him." Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name. So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said: "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man." Therefore, a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed."

Also on the fifth day according to Genesis 1, God's plan for His creation was to "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." Leviticus 18 is written concerning sexual immorality including homosexuality and sleeping with one's relatives. Verse 22 says, " You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." This verse speaks about homosexuality.

This is not just Old Testament. It is also of the New Testament, or the Covenant of Grace, which we are under. Romans 1:26 says "For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise, also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due."

Homosexuality, not homosexuals, is an abomination to God. God wants us to procreate, and homosexuals cannot procreate. The natural use does not mean that homosexuals are unnatural, but what they are doing is not a part of God's plans. These verses are not inspired by an anti-gay Deity, but by a loving, caring, God who only wants the best for us. These verses certainly are not about in any way, nor implying homophobia or violence against gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. No one is born gay, it is chosen. That is why it is called an "alternative lifestyle", which entails a choice. It is not like being born of a certain race or being male or female. It is not genetic.

Yes, God did create a helper for man, a woman. If this sounds homophobic to you, then you are mistaken. It is not. I understand that homosexuals suffer and are treated badly, and Jesus loves you and understands your pain. Christianity is a religion of love, but it is also a religion about justice and judgement. All of us will stand before God one day and will have to answer for everything we have done in this life. Homosexuality is an abomination to God. It is a sin and the wages of sin is death."[SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE]

 

[fdd2blk]

why did you quote me then post homo bible shit? i don't get it.

 

[doobnVA]

why did you quote me then post homo bible shit? i don't get it.

You mean "shpadoinkle" bible shit. "homo" is a derogatory term, unless it precedes the word "sapiens".

 

[fdd2blk]

You mean "shpadoinkle" bible shit. "homo" is a derogatory term, unless it precedes the word "sapiens".

man you are dumb, aren't you?

 

[doobnVA]

man you are dumb, aren't you?

Again with the insults. You must be very insecure. It's okay, I won't hold it against you.

 

[fdd2blk]

Again with the insults. You must be very insecure. It's okay, I won't hold it against you.

it was a question.

say "NO".



yeah, i'm pretty insecure. 'cause i'm fat and gay. lol

maybe if you didn't mock peoples medical conditions i could have little more respect for you.

 

[doobnVA]

Adding a punctuation mark does not make the question any less rhetorical. Justifying your own name-calling while condemning others is hypocritical.

Are you retarded? See, I can do it too! And boy, it feels great.

 

[doobnVA]

"Is your head that far up your ass, or does your breath always smell like shit?"

Not an insult, just a question.

 

[fdd2blk]

Adding a punctuation mark does not make the question any less rhetorical. Justifying your own name-calling while condemning others is hypocritical.

Are you retarded? See, I can do it too! And boy, it feels great.

no, i am not retarded.

funny, i don't feel offended.

see how easy that is? thank me later.

 

[fdd2blk]

"Is your head that far up your ass, or does your breath always smell like shit?"

Not an insult, just a question.

i just woke up and need to brush my teeth.

still not offended. keep trying.

 

[doobnVA]

Nothing like a self-important hypocrite, yessir. So, it's only name-calling if the person being called names feels insulted? And if you put a question mark at the end, it's automatically excused as a legitimate question? Just want to make sure I'm clear on the rules (which are subject to change at any time, I'd imagine).

At least you're fun, I'll give you that much.

I like games.

 

[fdd2blk]

Nothing like a self-important hypocrite, yessir. So, it's only name-calling if the person being called names feels insulted? And if you put a question mark at the end, it's automatically excused as a legitimate question? Just want to make sure I'm clear on the rules (which are subject to change at any time, I'd imagine).

At least you're fun, I'll give you that much.

I like games.

actually, i thought you were intelligent. then you said a few things that made me think otherwise. so i asked, just to clarify things. since you couldn't simply say, "no, I am not dumb", then i am left to make my own judgment.

it was a question.

 

[doobnVA]

To answer your question, no, I am not dumb. I do realize that people should prepare wills in advance, etc, to ensure that, should anything happen to them, their wishes will be carried out and people close to them in their lives aren't shut out of the process. I also realize that sometimes, things happen before you have a chance to prepare. Relationships end, houses are bought and sold... and young, healthy people sometimes die unexpectedly. Maybe we don't want to think about it, because we're all afraid of dying, or maybe people would rather focus on the happy event (falling in love, whatever) than to sit down and figure out how they're going to split things up when they die. Maybe it's too much paperwork, and we're all lazy.

The point is, people DON'T always plan for these things - and they shouldn't really be penalized for that. Pretty much all of us are guilty of being ill-prepared for something at least once in our life.

 

[fdd2blk]

To answer your question, no, I am not dumb. I do realize that people should prepare wills in advance, etc, to ensure that, should anything happen to them, their wishes will be carried out and people close to them in their lives aren't shut out of the process. I also realize that sometimes, things happen before you have a chance to prepare. Relationships end, houses are bought and sold... and young, healthy people sometimes die unexpectedly. Maybe we don't want to think about it, because we're all afraid of dying, or maybe people would rather focus on the happy event (falling in love, whatever) than to sit down and figure out how they're going to split things up when they die. Maybe it's too much paperwork, and we're all lazy.

The point is, people DON'T always plan for these things - and they shouldn't really be penalized for that. Pretty much all of us are guilty of being ill-prepared for something at least once in our life.

just so you know, i'm not married. been with my "wife" almost 20 years. we have decided against marriage for our own reason. i admit we, unlike gays, do have the option to marry and gain some rights. but i think that is wrong. why should i be "forced" to marry? nothing will change other than legal rights on paper. and if it's simply "legal rights" then marriage shouldn't be a part of it.

"people shouldn't gain 'rights' simply because they are married." this is where i stand.

still don't get how this makes me a bigot. =-/

 

[doobnVA]

You know, had you just stated YOUR beliefs from the beginning instead of saying everyone else is stupid and you don't agree with them, we probably could have avoided at least 4 very messy pages of this thread.

Here's how it works: Someone says "this is what I think.", and gives a reason to explain their thinking. Another person comes along and says "This is what I think.", which may or may not differ from the first person's thoughts. That way both parties in the exchange KNOW what the other person's opinion is. Coming into the conversation and asking people "Are you stupid?", without explaining what you believe and why it's different than what they believe, leads one to assume you have no real opinion and only wish to stir up hostility.

That's just my take on it.

Now that you've explained what you believe, I can rescind my earlier insinuation that your argument is based not on an actual opinion of the issue, but on your own hatred of anything that is different. In other words, you clearly aren't just some bigot throwing more hatred into the pot.

And I completely agree with you. I'm not married, nor do I believe that I should be "forced" into marriage in order to gain some perceived "benefit" or "right" that isn't otherwise available to me. Sadly, that's the way it works - not that those rights and benefits aren't available to anyone, just that it takes more effort to secure them if you aren't married.

 

[fdd2blk]

You know, had you just stated YOUR beliefs from the beginning instead of saying everyone else is stupid and you don't agree with them, we probably could have avoided at least 4 very messy pages of this thread.

Here's how it works: Someone says "this is what I think.", and gives a reason to explain their thinking. Another person comes along and says "This is what I think.", which may or may not differ from the first person's thoughts. That way both parties in the exchange KNOW what the other person's opinion is. Coming into the conversation and asking people "Are you stupid?", without explaining what you believe and why it's different than what they believe, leads one to assume you have no real opinion and only wish to stir up hostility.

That's just my take on it.

Now that you've explained what you believe, I can rescind my earlier insinuation that your argument is based not on an actual opinion of the issue, but on your own hatred of anything that is different. In other words, you clearly aren't just some bigot throwing more hatred into the pot.

And I completely agree with you. I'm not married, nor do I believe that I should be "forced" into marriage in order to gain some perceived "benefit" or "right" that isn't otherwise available to me. Sadly, that's the way it works - not that those rights and benefits aren't available to anyone, just that it takes more effort to secure them if you aren't married.

otherwise you just assume and attack. i get it now.

i'll decide what i share, thank you very much.

one shouldn't "assume".

 

[doobnVA]

otherwise you just assume and attack. i get it now.

i'll decide what i share, thank you very much.

one shouldn't "assume".

Well, when your first post in the thread is "don't call each other names" - and your second post then includes throwing around the term "homo" (which is a derogatory term, make no mistake) I don't think the assumption I made was that much of a leap even if it proved false in the end.

If you don't stir the pot, you never get to lick the spoon.

 

[Purplekrunchie]

Good question. Many psychologists believe that homophobia stems from an insecurity with one's own sexuality, or deep seeded fear of one's own latent homosexuality...makes sense to me.

Oh really?

Sounds like another weak attempt for said psychologists to make others feel guilty for having beliefs, and shame people into the habit trail. I dont care about this issue as much as I once did, however, I don't want to see it pushed in learning institutions to children as is the growing trend.