Same-Sex Marriage: Point of View

[Yumyumsuppertime]

do you really think a lot of people now a days in Christianity follow those rules? Well the answer is No. Thats the Hebrew Bible and Torah, which are jewish and hebrew, and only the Evangelicals follow those rules in our time.

I'm pretty sure Evangelicals cut their hair.
And yeah, the vast majority of Christians don't follow those laws, but when you get to the gay stuff, (which is exactly as "symbolic" as the rest of the stuff they don't care about) suddenly it's written in stone, literal law.

Because gay is icky. *nods*

[Liriena]

Im referring to Adam and Eve and how Eve was made from Adam's rib. I'm not questioning your inherent, god-given value as a person.

Requoting since everyone seems to have missed this.

I didn't, and I answered.
Although I did forget to add: Adam and Eve did not exist. They are mythology, as relevant to the issue of homosexuality as Apollo's romance with Hyacinthus (which is a superior love story).

[Heltonia]

Requoting since everyone seems to have missed this.

I didn't, and I answered.
Although I did forget to add: Adam and Eve did not exist. They are mythology, as relevant to the issue of homosexuality as Apollo's romance with Hyacinthus (which is a far more superior love story).

the teaching is still there.

[Valentir]

do you really think a lot of people now a days in Christianity follow those rules? Well the answer is No. Thats the Hebrew Bible and Torah, which are jewish and hebrew, and only the Evangelicals follow those rules in our time.

Kinda thinking he's an Evangelical, though, so that's probably not convincing.

The guy who quoted it? Most likely. They don't really help religion because they are fanatics. I'm catholic but I really don't think God is against every single thing humans do, especially gay marriage. I also like your Signature by the way.

[Transhuman Proteus]

Im referring to Adam and Eve and how Eve was made from Adam's rib. I'm not questioning your inherent, god-given value as a person.

Requoting since everyone seems to have missed this.

And God put naked Adam and Eve in a big garden... ergo we are living sinfully unless we are naked in a big garden.

And being vegetarians.

And not having children.

[Kvatchdom]

Im referring to Adam and Eve and how Eve was made from Adam's rib. I'm not questioning your inherent, god-given value as a person.

Requoting since everyone seems to have missed this.

How do you make a woman out of a rib?

[The Tiger Kingdom]

I'm pretty sure Evangelicals cut their hair.
And yeah, the vast majority of Christians don't follow those laws, but when you get to the gay stuff, (which is exactly as "symbolic" as the rest of the stuff they don't care about) suddenly it's written in stone, literal law.

Because gay is icky. *nods*

One is drawn towards that conclusion as the likely one, it seems.

Requoting since everyone seems to have missed this.

I didn't, and I answered.
Although I did forget to add: Adam and Eve did not exist. They are mythology, as relevant to the issue of homosexuality as Apollo's romance with Hyacinthus (which is a far more superior love story).

Adam and Eve's not even a love story. It has all the romance of adding one plus one.

[Hathradic States]

Emotional harm to the rejected ex-boyfriend. *nods*

Hence, logically we must ban all form of human relationships and human interaction...

Dude, that's so gonna suck.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

I didn't, and I answered.
Although I did forget to add: Adam and Eve did not exist. They are mythology, as relevant to the issue of homosexuality as Apollo's romance with Hyacinthus (which is a far more superior love story).

the teaching is still there.

Yes, we can all learn from the story of Apollo and Hyacinthus as literal religious law.
Because that's what you meant, I'm sure.

Requoting since everyone seems to have missed this.

How do you make a woman out of a rib?

Very carefully...?
(kill me now)

[Liriena]

I didn't, and I answered.
Although I did forget to add: Adam and Eve did not exist. They are mythology, as relevant to the issue of homosexuality as Apollo's romance with Hyacinthus (which is a far more superior love story).

the teaching is still there.

The teaching being what? That us humans are the direct descendants from hundreds of years of inbreeding?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Kinda thinking he's an Evangelical, though, so that's probably not convincing.

The guy who quoted it? Most likely. They don't really help religion because they are fanatics. I'm catholic but I really don't think God is against every single thing humans do, especially gay marriage. I also like your Signature by the way.

Thank you! And I agree. I figure that if God made two people gay, and they fall in love and have a happy life together, then that's part of the wonder and beauty of existence. I don't get it, but I don't get people enjoying liver either, and see it as much the same thing: A likely inborn matter of personal taste.

[Anachronous Rex]

Im referring to Adam and Eve and how Eve was made from Adam's rib. I'm not questioning your inherent, god-given value as a person.

Requoting since everyone seems to have missed this.

Let us assume that god has no problem with homosexuality.

Would god have made the first couple on earth a gay couple?

That plan seems to have an obvious flaw.

[Heltonia]

It seems we're all at an impasse here.

I've stated my beliefs and why homosexuality is wrong and is a sin.
I respectfully disagree.

Just because a lot has changed in the last 2000 years, it doesnt mean something back then isnt as true as it is right now. It seems to me this is the slippery slope where a lot of your acceptance for this stems from.
Be careful with that.

[Liriena]

Yes, we can all learn from the story of Apollo and Hyacinth as literal religious law.
Because that's what you meant, I'm sure.

Apollo and Hyacinthus teaches us...umm...if we are involved in a gay love triangle between Apollo and Zephyr we'll get killed and transformed into a very pretty flower?

[Penguin Union Nation]

Don't force other people to live by your personal religious beliefs if they're not hurting anyone (and it isn't hurting anyone if gays marry). If God has a problem with it, I'm sure He'll take it up with them.

Marriages of the past were largely social, even business contracts, between families, to exchange or maintain holding of property, be it land or other valuables. People weren't "dating", they weren't very free to choose their own mate, they were married off while they were quite young, and they had obligations to provide children as a workforce in the community.

Modern romantic love, the kind that pulls at the heartstrings, with the Valentines, the burning passion, marrying who you wish to, that's a fairly modern concept that I'm sure the people in Biblical times would be aghast at. You simply did what had to be done for your people to survive back then. Familial love was out of obligation, not affection.

We're no longer the savages we used to be, and we can't afford to pretend marriage was some kind of convenent made by a higher power who may not even exist (though I personally believe it does) as a general rule. Inconveniencing the hundreds of gays who want to be married simply because you refuse to let people think differently than your own religion is not only selfish, but dangerous madness that subverts the liberty promised for Americans.

Believe what you wish, that's fine. If you truly believe it's immoral, then be convicted. However, people have the right to not ascribe to strict Christian doctrine.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Yes, we can all learn from the story of Apollo and Hyacinth as literal religious law.
Because that's what you meant, I'm sure.

Apollo and Hyacinthus teaches us...umm...if we are involved in a gay love triangle between Apollo and Zephyr we'll get killed and transformed into a very pretty flower?

That from being destroyed in love, great beauty can arise?

I dunno, I got nothing.

[Anachronous Rex]

Requoting since everyone seems to have missed this.

How do you make a woman out of a rib?

Well most of the cells in bone are nucleic, so getting the DNA shouldn't be a problem. You simply remove the Y-chromosome, and insert a second X-chromosome from another cell. It's a bit incestuous, but it should get the job done.

The bigger question is, where did he implant the egg? Human wombs having not been invented yet. Personally, I'm guessing orangutan.

[Arthurista]

There's probably been multiple different threads on this topic, but I there doesn't seem to be one among the first page or two that I can see. Anyways, on to what I was thinking earlier...

You see, I'm a Christian. Yeah, many of you either groaned or cheered, but still. The problem I have with same-sex marriage is that, in my honest opinion, and according to my belief in the Bible as God's word, is that it is essentially wrong to lay with a man as you would with a man, or lay with a woman as you would with a woman. But... I also understand that everyone has the right to be wrong.

However. Marriage, or at least my interpretation of it, is a holy bond between two people under God. As - again, in my opinion - it is wrong for a man to lay with a man, or a woman to lay with a woman, it is heresy to marry a man to a man or woman to a woman. But yet there is a solution for those that are not of the Christian faith that would wish to have the same benefits as those that are married. What about a civil union, or something outside the Church that is not deemed as marriage, but brings with it the same benefits? Heck, for all I care, it could even have more benefits - simply don't call it marriage or force the Church to condone it and marry the two.

What would you say, NSG? Would this be a viable solution? And what would your opinions be of Same-Sex marriage in general?

IMHO this argument is only valid to the extent that it assumes marriage is a christian or even religious monopoly. A marriage, as far as the law is concerned if you aren't living in a theocracy, is simply some kind of pact that creates legally enforceable rights and duties among two individuals, a kind of pseudo-contract despite all the bollocks you hear in family court cases. A religious individual, naturally, is entitled to his or her own opinion, but again unless you live in a backwards medieval theocracy the law should have no regards as to the private religious inclinations of individuals and apply equally to all citizens. You have the right to not recognise a same-sex marriage as an individual, but if the law passes through a country's legislature you can't exactly say they have no right to create the institution.

[Fnordgasm 5]

This is my honest opinion, Please don't hate me for it.

Being a strong baptist Christian, I believe The bible DOES say: "A man shall not lay with a man as he would with a woman"

That's in Leviticus 18:22.

If two people of the same sex marry, then it is almost definite that they will sleep together. I'm trying to suggest that no Christian should believe that people of the same sex marry for the bible clearly says it.

In regards to lesbianism, Just because the bible says "man" the word "man" applies to women as well.

Thank you for allowing me to speak on this interesting topic. I look forward to seeing some more of your posts.

The issue isn't what the bible says but whether or not those using the bible to make their arguments are applying the same standards in regards to the homosexuality as they are to what the bible has to say about a great number of things. The accusation here is that those that oppose homosexuality cherry pick the parts of the bible they want to follow and ignore the rest. I'm sure I will upset a lot of more liberally-minded Christians when I say that they should follow the Bible to the letter. It is the word of your god and if you truly believe then you should treat it as such. In this particular case I am explicitly saying that unless you support death sentences for homosexuals you are a bad Christian. Not a bad person, mind just a bad Christian. Apologies if this offends you however this apology is subject to withdrawal if you insist on attempting to apply your version of morality on to those who do not share it.

[Heltonia]

Don't force other people to live by your personal anachronistic bullshit if they're not hurting anyone (and it isn't hurting anyone if gays marry). If God has a problem with it, I'm sure He'll take it up with them.

-snip-.

God loves everyone. He loves the sinners and none of us are perfect. He has no reason to smite the gays as he does to any other of his children. Your understanding of God lacks compassion.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Yes, we can all learn from the story of Apollo and Hyacinth as literal religious law.
Because that's what you meant, I'm sure.

Apollo and Hyacinthus teaches us...umm...if we are involved in a gay love triangle between Apollo and Zephyr we'll get killed and transformed into a very pretty flower?

Yup. All literal, too.
So...uh...don't do that.

It seems we're all at an impasse here.

I've stated my beliefs and why homosexuality is wrong and is a sin.
I respectfully disagree.

Just because a lot has changed in the last 2000 years, it doesnt mean something back then isnt as true as it is right now. It seems to me this is the slippery slope where a lot of your acceptance for this stems from.
Be careful with that.

It seems to me you've long since fallen off the bigotry slippery slope, because you still haven't given a single reason why homosexuality is bad outside of a limited and cherrypicked, exclusively Christian context, which is not valid to very many people, nor should it necessarily be. I can't even say your reasoning doesn't make sense, because I'm not seeing any reasoning coming out of you at all - it's just knee-jerk reaction and circular logic based on closed-minded and ignorant bigotry.
Oh, and the passages you quoted came from far before 2000 years, Leviticus is from the Torah. Do you even have any idea what you're talking about here regarding your own supposedly holy scriptures?

[Liriena]

It seems we're all at an impasse here.

I've stated my beliefs and why homosexuality is wrong and is a sin.
I respectfully disagree.

Just because a lot has changed in the last 2000 years, it doesnt mean something back then isnt as true as it is right now. It seems to me this is the slippery slope where a lot of your acceptance for this stems from.
Be careful with that.

It's no impasse at all. It's just you refusing to acknowledge the fact that you have been thoroughly refuted.
Homosexuality was never a sin.
Homosexuality is not inherently wrong.
Indeed, a lot has changed in 2000 years. For starters, gay marriage is no longer legal in China (when it used to be, back in the good old days).
And your claims were never true to begin with.
The slippery slope argument is cute, since it makes a very compelling case for banning marriage outright. I mean, if you let a man and a woman marry, what is going to stop you from letting a man marry another man or multiple women? Historically, it seems that nothing can stop THAT slippery slope.

Thanks for playing and...


Welcome to NSG

[Anachronous Rex]

It seems we're all at an impasse here.

I've stated my beliefs and why homosexuality is wrong and is a sin.
I respectfully disagree.

Just because a lot has changed in the last 2000 years, it doesnt mean something back then isnt as true as it is right now. It seems to me this is the slippery slope where a lot of your acceptance for this stems from.
Be careful with that.

You're right, clearly we should all go back to an era of sexism, racial segregation, slavery, and death by stoning.

We wouldn't want that slippery slope now, would we?

[Heltonia]

just because I have a different set of beliefs it gives you no right to attack me for it.

You only see me as an enemy and warp everything I say to fill your perception. Theres no saving this thread.

[Liriena]

Apollo and Hyacinthus teaches us...umm...if we are involved in a gay love triangle between Apollo and Zephyr we'll get killed and transformed into a very pretty flower?

That from being destroyed in love, great beauty can arise?

I dunno, I got nothing.

Sounds legit.