Gay marriage is being legalized faster than...
- Thread starter Medical Grade
- Start date
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
how about we give the gays marriage and the heteros get civil unions?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
that would make sense, as it is a medical need and they are bound by the hippocratic oath.
conversely, i have heard of many pharmacies that refuse this and that is somehow within their rights.
remember the pastor that wouldn't marry the interracial couple?
he didn't go to jail.
he was universally scorned for being a racist asshole, but there is no possible fucking way to criminalize his actions (or lack of).
so what you are saying will not happen. mark my words.
and preaching against it? why i believe that falls under the first amendment. you should check it out, it's a cool amendment and shit.
Tenner
Well-Known Member
Thats.... interesting.
Still a hole still a stink though
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
someone pulled that on me once.Thats.... interesting.
Still a hole still a stink though
i now try to return the favor whenever possible
no hard feelings intended, just razzing ya
sharon1
Active Member
Why? Marriage is a tenet of scripture. It's been in place for quite some time.
I suppose if it were a homosexual doctrine for thousands of years you could argue for that but otherwise, it's niot relivent.
sharon1
Active Member
It's not always a medical need, you know that.
Several places are looking into making it illegal. Didn't take long to find.
The scenero I mentioned earlier about the divorced couple was way off... sorry about that. I was going on a general memory that is many years old.
It was a lesbian couple that adopted a child, one converted to Christianity and a judge declaired that the former spouse could not say anything or teach any anti-gay stuff. That would include going to church and hearing it preached against.
So it's not against the pastor, it was an injunction against a parent and their right to teach what they believe.
No need to get snarky Uncle Buck....I say it will. Time will tell, won't it? *grin
Urca
Well-Known Member
lol well here's a history lesson for you... until about 1100, marriage was CIVIL contract, no church involvement. then, bam, the catholic church takes over marriage CEREMONY. still, its a fairly modern thing to have marriages for love, not for personal gain. And just because traditionally a church administers a marriage ceremony, its still a civil/legal contract between two people. marriage is just a word, its the act that counts. church doctrine should stay out of marriage, unless the marrying couple decides upon it. get off your high horse you homophobe
sharon1
Active Member
Well well well.....another so called "kinder-gentle-political correct" admonition to stop all the "hate".
Listen...I'm not on any "high-horse". I simply think everyone involved could obtain what they want, go on with their lives, and we could get on with other important issues if we'd just use 2 terms and leave it at that.
I am not homophobic, not in any way shape or form. You wanna live a gay lifestyle, be my guest. Just don't try to tell me I shouldn't teach that it's wrong, if in fact I feel it is.
And I came back to say....pastors have ALREADY been imprisioned for teaching scripture against homosexuality in other countries. Sweeden, the UK, and Brazil have done it....just from a quick google on the subject.
I have no doubt it will one day happen here.
And that is my opinion. If you don't like that, fine and well.....but I suggest you get things straight and knock-off the homophobe comments.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
yes it is. any pregnancy whatsoever carries with it the risk of complications that may result in death.
and no form of birth control is 100%
are they making it illegal to refuse to sell women medical products, which is within their rights to purchase according to the SCOTUS?
good.
ok then.
i didn't intend to be snarky, but i did want to emphasize the absurdity of your statement and remind you of the first amendment.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
actually, everyone involved would not be getting what they want if we continue to use two terms. that is kind of the entire point.
as for me, i simply think everyone involved could obtain what they want, go on with their lives, and we could get on with other important issues if we'd just use 1 term and leave it at that.
why would it be "wrong" to be born a certain way?
sharon1
Active Member
Fair 'nuff...but aparently some judge disagrees that a parent's right to teach scripture to their own child is covered under that amendment. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35365
Urca
Well-Known Member
being gay isnt wrong. shit i cannot stand uber flamboyantly gay people, but I still think that they have the right to do as they please, include adopt and be married. just because they choose to let everyone know they are gay in the most obnoxious way possible doesnt mean they are less human, deserve less rights. its ridiculous that even them being american citizens, they are not allowed to marry, yet we can take in a whole bunch of illegal immigrants, and let them breed, and take care of them.... but we cant even extend full civil rights to american citizens?
sharon1
Active Member
Note please, that I said "IF" I felt that way.....however, I do believe scripture.why would it be "wrong" to be born a certain way?
I do not wish to hijack this thread and turn it into a banter about the Bible or anything. I realize probably 99% of the folks here don't believe in it, and I'm fine with that.
There is no sense in arguing about it, because I won't change anyone's mind about it, and certainly nobody is going to change my mind as well, so it's pointless.
But I would stand and fight for the rights of homosexuals to enter into civil unions, with all the perks that married couples have with survivorship, benifits and insurance issues and beyond.
I just think they'd get a much better reaction if they fought for that, rather than step all over the actual/traditional teachings about marriage.
Steve French
Well-Known Member
I don't think a single person said anything in this thread suggesting that "being gay was wrong." The topic in question was gay marriage. I don't care either way, but i think maybe the money being spent on legislation for this could be put towards better uses, like maybe getting some fucking reading comprehension programs in schools.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
note please that i said 'would'.
i find it hard to believe that god or jesus would say being born gay is "wrong".
we are all god's children, and if jesus existed, i don't think he'd give two shits if you were gay or straight.
"step all over" marriage? i think heteros are doing a good enough job of that.
all they want is to not be categorized like second class or inferior people simply for the way they were born. i don't think that's asking a whole lot.
and it has been pointed out before in this thread that 'traditional' marriage has changed often throughout the years (and across cultures). it used to be a means of conveying inheritance and wealth and had nothing to do with the church. now you can get married at drive throughs in vegas. i don't think there's anything left to destroy.
Urca
Well-Known Member
absolutely!!!!!! shit just pass the law or ignore it, i'd rather have a generation of children that can actually read! so many kids i went to school with could barely read, or even think analytically. they couldnt read a normal clock, couldnt read anything written in cursive, thought that reading was stupid. Childhood literacy is the greatest gift we could give to anyone
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i think it was "suggested" right there.
Steve French
Well-Known Member
I don't know how you could have missed this. Seeing as it was the sentence right next to the one you posted.