The Debate

[Replies: 16]
Last Post Dec 17, 2006 7:28 PM by: hetero_canadian_chick
hetero_canadian_chick
hetero_canadian_chick
Posts: 15
From: Parksville
Registered: 12/12/06
(17 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 17, 2006 7:28 PM
dmhandy, you make a very valid point. After watching the movie 2 and a half times and being on this forum my views are starting to shift. Granted I have never been against gay rights, I was against gay marriage and for civil unions. After watching the movie and hearing Shel's explanation of what a civil union entales, I am starting to question my views. I guess, if one of my friends was gay (and there is a slight possibility that one of my guy friends could be) I would be happy for them if they announced they were getting married. I wouldn't want them to feel like they were less important then me just because they were gay. I'm still not 100% sure if I'm for gay marriage, but I'm sure that I could be easily pursuaded.

Oh yeah, and this is one straight girl that really wants to see what a gay pride parade is like. Is it wrong that I also want to go to a gay club, too? I mean, hot, shirtless guys, and television makes gay clubs look so much more fun then regular straoght clubs. Do many straight girls hang out in gay clubs? Is it also wrong that I want a gay guy friend similar to Shel or Will from Will and Grace? It just seems like it would be so much fun!

But anywho, I do agree that gay people should have the same rights as straight people. I just have to be pursuaded a bit more to push me over to support gay marriage. So, pursuade away!

--
The gays are turning me into a gay rights supporter! Ahhh! LOL!!! Watch "Wedding Wars"<---super funny and really makes you think!
dmhandy
dmhandy
Posts: 1
From: Fargo, ND
Registered: 12/17/06
(16 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 17, 2006 5:36 PM
First of all, to all those who think being gay is a choice, you are incorrect. Do those who believe being gay is a choice believe everything that someone from a pulpit tells you?

I knew I was gay before I persued the intimate side of a relationship. God wouldn't create anyone or anything to be condemned to damnation.

If people could meet couples who have been together for 10, 20, 30 years or more, they would find out that two gay people stay together for more than sex. My husband and I have been together for almost five years and our love has grown in the time we have been together. Our bond goes much futher than just they physical side.

As for gay marriage, I believe that gay people should have the same rights and their heterosexual counterparts. Way too many gay people who spend their lives with one person lose much more than their spouse once the spouse passes away. In many cases, the widows and widowers of gay spouses are left with nothing after building a life with someone they love more than anyone in the world. Widows and widowers lose their homes, savings, social security income, and many other things to people who have very little to do with the departed gay relative's life but believe they have the right to the dead relatives belongs. This leaves the widow or widower with nothing but a few momentos.

Those who believe GLBT people are amoral and hedonistic monsters have never taken the time to know a gay person and don't want to because they don't want to find out that they maybe a loving and God fearing person.

As for "Wedding Wars", I really enjoyed the movie. "Wedding Wars" showed the prospective of many gay people who want their relationships to be equal to all marriages.
radiojock
radiojock
Posts: 3
Registered: 12/17/06
(15 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 17, 2006 11:31 AM
I still can't believe that some people think that being gay is a choice. Why would a person choose to live a life (being gay) that could cost that person his life by being beaten to death, threatened, having to live in fear all the time, living a life that is full of ridicule and being outcast, having to hide who you are, and "choosing" to be completely unhappy. Nobody would choose to live a life like that ever. Being gay makes us not much different than anyone else-as we all do the same things a straight person does, eat breakfast, shower, go to work, rent movies...etc-exactly the same thing a straight person does on a daily basis. The only difference is for those of us who are gay (including myself) is who our heart falls for and that should just happen to be the same-sex.
Pennt30
Pennt30
Posts: 3
Registered: 12/11/06
(14 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 16, 2006 12:23 PM
Sodom & Gomorrah were destroyed because of homosexuality.
Please read:

In Genesis chapter 18 three angels sent from GOD visited Abraham.
Look at what they said -
Gen. 18:20-21
"And the Lord said, "Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great and because their SIN is very grave,
"I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to Me and if not I will know."

In Genesis 19 two of the angels come into the city.
Lot convinces them to stay the night with him.
This is what happens:

Genesis 19:4-11
4Now before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both old and young, all the people from every quarter, surrounded the house. 5And they called to Lot and said to him, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may know them carnally.” 6So Lot went out to them through the doorway, shut the door behind him, 7and said, “Please, my brethren, do not do so wickedly! 8“See now, I have two daughters who have not known a man; please, let me bring them out to you, and you may do to them as you wish; only do nothing to these men, since this is the reason they have come under the shadow of my roof.” 9And they said, “Stand back!” Then they said, “This one came in to stay here, and he keeps acting as a judge; now we will deal worse with you than with them.” So they pressed hard against the man Lot, and came near to break down the door. 10But the men reached out their hands and pulled Lot into the house with them, and shut the door. 11And they struck the men who were at the doorway of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that they became weary trying to find the door.

Notice in verse 5 the men of Sodom talking about the two angels who appeared to them as men said they wanted to know them carnally.

That word know means to have sex with.
Please notice this verse that uses the same word.
Gen. 4:1
Now Adam knew his wife Eve, and she conceived and bore Cain.

The word knew as used in both scriptures carries the definition of a sexual relationship.
If you want to argue with the plain definition of a word fine.

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of homosexuality as the verses clearly state.
Hospitality had nothing to do with it.

Hebrews 8:10-12 is a prophecy quoted by Jeremiah regarding the time when the Old Testament would be done away and the New Testament would come into effect.
This happened in Acts 2 when the first Gospel sermon of Jesus Christ was preached.

Under the old testament you were born into covenant relationship to GOD.
You were taught after you grew older.
Under the new testament a person must hear and obey the gospel to be in covenant relationship with GOD.

You are right that we need to listen to what GOD has written.
It doesn't matter what my opinion about HIS word is.
So when we read a plain statement in GOD'S word then we are to obey it.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
9Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

Romans 1:26-27
26For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27Likewise 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.

WHAT DOES IT SAY!!!!!!!!
Pennt30
Pennt30
Posts: 3
Registered: 12/11/06
(13 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 16, 2006 11:46 AM
You make a valid point about not following the Bible.
Any person who does not follow what the Bible says in all aspects is no better off than the person they are Condeming.
But - that still doesn't change what the Bible says.
That just means both parties are condemned.

It is hypocritical for a person to condem a homosexual but then live their life as a: liar, drug addict, drunk, in adultery, etc...

The point about reproduction -
AIDS can be contracted in other ways but it is a medical fact that it can be contracted by same sex.

Do you know it is not possible for any disease to be contracted in sex if it is carried out as GOD commanded.
HE commands that sex only be used in the marriage relationship between a man and women.
HE also commands that they never have sex with anyone else before they are married.

Any sexual relationship before marriage is fornication and is wrong.
As we know any sexual relationship in marriage with anyone but your spouse is adultery.
Hebrews 13:4

Marriage defined by GOD is always a man and a woman, never the same sex.
I challenge to find one example in the Bible where GOD approves of this.

The purpose of sex between the husband and wife is not for the primary purpose of children.
Anyone who proclaims that is wrong.
That is one of the benefits if one chooses to have children.
One of the reasons for marriage was for men and women to fulfill that desire and when done as GOD has commanded is fine.

True - GOD loves us all.
HE loved us so much HE gave HIS Son for us.
BUT
GOD hates sin and will not condone or allow it.
example - Parents love their children no matter what they do but when that child disobeys there must be punishment.
Does that mean the Parent doesn't love the child?
Once the parent makes the rule the punishment must be carried out no matter what.

I chose to be straight every day because it is what GOD commands.
Again - homosexuality is a choice it is not a birth defect.
People make the choice each day to steal or not to steal, to lie or not to lie, etc..

This is the reason a person is not born a homosexual:

GOD condems this in the Bible -
We are born in the image of GOD (Gen. 1:26)
If a person is born a homosexual that means GOD made him that way.
That would make GOD unjust for making me a sinner and then condeming me for it.

Here is the ultimate choice -
If you don't care what the Bible says or don't believe it then you will live any way you want because the Bible will not be your standard.

If you profess to believe in the Bible then you must live by its standard.

No one can have it both ways.

To conclude on your beginning point: The majority of people claim to live by it and don't.
Even to the point of condeming one type of lifestyle or sin while living in sin themselves.
BUT
that doesn't change what the Bible says and two wrongs don't make it right.
praetorian412
praetorian412
Posts: 101
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Registered: 11/30/06
(12 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 13, 2006 1:18 PM
10-chan - You are right about the separation of church and state. It was a provision that was originally introduced by Thomas Jefferson. Ironically, the same man that is credited by historians as an abolitionist, while at the same time owning his own slaves and even knocking one of them up (Sally Hemmins).
Rist6214
Rist6214
Posts: 2
From: Ortona, FL
Registered: 12/12/06
(11 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 13, 2006 11:01 AM
Varny, you made a great point by the way. Being gay is not a choice, just like being straight it not a choice. I see that no one who disagrees with you has even bother to answer your question, nor do I think they can. Keep up the great posts.
footdoc
footdoc
Posts: 233
From: new jersey
Registered: 10/18/06
(10 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 13, 2006 9:28 AM
That's really a good point Chan. The last time I checked, we don't live in a theocracy.
10-chan
10-chan
Posts: 16
From: Halifax, NS
Registered: 12/12/06
(9 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 12, 2006 10:35 PM
In government class...during my long past memories in the US, I do ~strongly~ recall that somewhere on some official document there was this thing about seperation of church and state....

It really, strongly seems the ONLY thing keeping same sex marriages down is strictly religious reasons. Yet, doesn't this go directly against this theoretical seperation of church and state?

So much is attatched...legally...to marriage. Marriage is NOT exclusively a Christian affair, either. So, really, isn't this 'moral stance' against same sex marriage going against not only the supposed seperation of church and state but that whole pride in equality American brag about?

--
Dum Spiro Spero
itsfolly
itsfolly
Posts: 3
Registered: 12/12/06
(8 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 12, 2006 10:20 PM
Its interesting that this has become a debate about the Bible. For what its worth, the sin that Sodom & Gomorrah were destroyed over was inhospitality. Lott's family was saved even though he offered his daughters to an angry mob (no longer an acceptable option by society), and later, his daughters seduced him. His wife was turned to stone for just looking back. The apostle Paul never met or spoke with Jesus, but is often quoted on social and moral issues, even though some of his views are in direct conflict with Jesus' attributed teachings. Finally, please read Hebrews 8:10-12. Basically, it says to stop telling other people what to believe, God has written His truth on everyone's heart. In other words: mind your own business, God doesn't need anyone to speak for Him.

Now, back to the real issue. Preserving the sanctity (holiness) of marriage should remain in the hands of the various churches. Most churches impose restrictions and refuse to bless unions based on their own religious tenets. It’s quite common, for instance, to deny couples who are not of the same faith. Not all marriages are performed by the clergy. Many licenses are legally recorded by judges, elected officials, notaries and others. The legal issues surrounding the marriage contract are the domain of the government. This includes over 1000 federal laws where the treatment differs between married people and single people in the United States. Many effect financial issues such as pensions, health benefits, taxes, shared responsibility for debts, disability benefits, and transfer of property between spouses. Others are more pragmatic, like joint parenting rights and obligations, adoption, confidentiality of marriage communications, next-of-kin status for emergency medical decisions, funerals and bereavement leave. Why would anyone oppose extending the rights and obligations of legal marriage to any couple that in all other respects satisfies the requirements of establishing this contract?
praetorian412
praetorian412
Posts: 101
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Registered: 11/30/06
(7 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 12, 2006 4:17 PM
Exactly footdoc... and as for infidelity and forinication? How can you accuse someone of infidelity or better yet forinication, if you don't allow them to marry in the first place? Um.. Hello! They can't have it both ways!
footdoc
footdoc
Posts: 233
From: new jersey
Registered: 10/18/06
(6 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 12, 2006 2:24 PM
What about "sodomy" between a man and a woman? Or even better, a man and his wife? Is that okay in the Bible? I know there are plenty of people that are married that committ this sin.
10-chan
10-chan
Posts: 16
From: Halifax, NS
Registered: 12/12/06
(5 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 12, 2006 1:54 PM
Uhm..ok, on the thing about 'Sodom'

The term "sodomy' was taken from the city's name, under the presumption of what the people were doing, as I recall it's not clearly defined ~WHAT~ they were doing.

On the note of terms used in the bible, didn't Job presumably have a Unicorn pulling his plough or something in the King James version? That got changed..

Anyway, my point is, the word 'Sodomy' is derived from the name of the city...not the other way around, and, lo and behold this term was freely used later in the bible, as if the word were always there.

I imagine there was probably a term for it, but not, certianly, in the English language. We already know the bible is translated from a menagerie of other languages. We also know MANY terms are mis-translated. Aside from which, we also know people as King James altered the bible (despite the part that clearly states not to..go figure)

All in all, theoretically, with all this in mind, is it possible this biased opinion is one created, not by the authors of this text, but at a later date by those wishing to create such a bias?

After all, even Lucifer was once an angel.
praetorian412
praetorian412
Posts: 101
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Registered: 11/30/06
(4 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 12, 2006 11:46 AM
Choice? I wrote a whole entire topic on the matter... I suggest that anyone who thinks that it is a choice read my article.
Varny
Varny
Posts: 2
Registered: 12/11/06
(3 of 17)

Re: The Debate

Dec 12, 2006 11:33 AM
Ok then..let me go back to a quote, "Ignorance is bliss", Its funny on how people refer to the bible against homosexuality, but I gurantee you that, you only follow the bible according to what it states about homosexuality. First of all aids is not a gay disease, gay men are just at more risk for contracting HIV if they dont use protection. Now having kids...under marriage I dont think it states that you need to have children once your married, and with that said god also said man lies with woman for having kids, now if youre having sex without the intent of having kids, then my god it's an abomination which means 90% of the people in the world are going to hell. Next god loves all of his creations, no matter what. Lastly its not a choice, did you answer my question about when you chose to be straight, prolly not cause you cant
Pages: 2 - [ 1 2 | Next ]
Poll
What are your beliefs?
What are your beliefs on the gay marriage debate?
Votes: 8