Is anyone actually harmed by gay marriage?

[Liriena]

No, it's lying in general.

Do you have a source for that? Not just passages from the Bible, but the rulings of theologians, churches, etc.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09469a.htm

[Nationalist State of Knox]

No, it's lying in general.

Do you have a source for that? Not just passages from the Bible, but the rulings of theologians, churches, etc.

Specifically, the Roman Catholic view (ex-Catholic here):

"A lie consists in speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving." The Lord denounces lying as the work of the devil: "You are of your father the devil, . . . there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies."

The Catechism has a lot dedicated to truthfulness:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... s2c2a8.htm

[Condunum]

When was this issued?

It was released in 1992 by John Paul II.

So what the modern church says was the definition is what it actually means...?

[Nationalist State of Knox]

It was released in 1992 by John Paul II.

Lovely. So I guess that's the official church position?

Yup, and the Orthodox is similar, if not worse. Also, as the Catholics and Orthodox believe that only the Church can interpret scripture correctly, your interpretations of Leviticus, Deuteronomy etc. are invalid in their eyes.

[Mkuki]

Do you have a source for that? Not just passages from the Bible, but the rulings of theologians, churches, etc.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09469a.htm

Do you have a source for that? Not just passages from the Bible, but the rulings of theologians, churches, etc.

Specifically, the Roman Catholic view (ex-Catholic here):

"A lie consists in speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving." The Lord denounces lying as the work of the devil: "You are of your father the devil, . . . there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies."

The Catechism has a lot dedicated to truthfulness:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... s2c2a8.htm

Ah. Thank you, both. I figured lying was considered sin, but wasn't entirely sure.

[Nationalist State of Knox]

It was released in 1992 by John Paul II.

So what the modern church says was the definition is what it actually means...?

How do you mean?

[Chishimotata]

Lovely. So I guess that's the official church position?

Yup, and the Orthodox is similar, if not worse. Also, as the Catholics and Orthodox believe that only the Church can interpret scripture correctly, your interpretations of Leviticus, Deuteronomy etc. are invalid in their eyes.

Oh. That sucks. Thank you for correcting me.

[Condunum]

So what the modern church says was the definition is what it actually means...?

How do you mean?

What the modern church says doesn't matter for two shits if they've mistranslated the passage, and they have. That's why there's contention on what the church's position should be, because they're using inaccurate translations.

[Freiheit Reich]

And he also pretends to be a Libertarian, may I add.

Well that's a fucking joke. Libertarians don't think there should be state laws banning personal relationships.

I don't believe we should ban gay marriage. I just said gay marriage (and any gay relationship) shames the families.

I believe the govt. should get out of marriage entirely. Let marriage be a private ceremony. If a man wants to marry 100 other men that is fine, the govt. shouldn't care either way. Same if a man wants to marry his sister, daughter, or his dog.

Personally, I am against gay marriage and gay relationships but I think they should have the right to this perversion. I just don't understand why we need the govt. involved in marriage at all.

[Nationalist State of Knox]

How do you mean?

What the modern church says doesn't matter for two shits if they've mistranslated the passage, and they have. That's why there's contention on what the church's position should be, because they're using inaccurate translations.

the Catholics and Orthodox believe that only the Church can interpret scripture correctly, your interpretations of Leviticus, Deuteronomy etc. are invalid in their eyes.

It's the correct position in the eyes of God, or so they believe.

[The Scientific States]

Well that's a fucking joke. Libertarians don't think there should be state laws banning personal relationships.

I don't believe we should ban gay marriage. I just said gay marriage (and any gay relationship) shames the families.

I believe the govt. should get out of marriage entirely. Let marriage be a private ceremony. If a man wants to marry 100 other men that is fine, the govt. shouldn't care either way. Same if a man wants to marry his sister, daughter, or his dog.

Personally, I am against gay marriage and gay relationships but I think they should have the right to this perversion. I just don't understand why we need the govt. involved in marriage at all.

How is gay marriage a perversion?

[Freiheit Reich]

Fascist libertarian? Have ideologies lost their meaning? Political ideology fusion has gone too far these days.

When I see an obvious fascist calling themselves a libertarian I'll call them out on what they are.

How am I a fascist? I said before we could allow gay marriage but the govt. should just not recognize it. The gays can have their ceremony with rice, flowers, kisses, rings, etc.. and then go home and have their fun and fights and possibly even divorce in the future. All the good and bad things like normal married couples. The only difference is their marriage should not be recognized by the govt.

Of course, ending govt. recognition of all marriages would make things better (except for divorce lawyers). The gays would actually benefit from my idea. Even better for them, with no recognition of their marriages, a man could marry 100 men and have a harem with no legal consequences.

A fascist would probably send them to jail, hard labor, or death camps. I supported forced reeducation camps for them in the distant past but I no longer do. We shouldn't try to force them to change (although a friendly propaganda campaign encouraging them to change is acceptable).

[Liriena]

Well that's a fucking joke. Libertarians don't think there should be state laws banning personal relationships.

1. I don't believe we should ban gay marriage. I just said gay marriage (and any gay relationship) shames the families.

2. I believe the govt. should get out of marriage entirely. Let marriage be a private ceremony. If a man wants to marry 100 other men that is fine, the govt. shouldn't care either way. Same if a man wants to marry his sister, daughter, or his dog.

Personally, I am against gay marriage and gay relationships but I think they should have the right to this perversion. I just don't understand why we need the govt. involved in marriage at all.

1. That's an awful generalization on your part, and you know it.
2. And what should be done about the hundreds of legal rights, obligations and protections provided by marriage?
3. Homosexuality in general is no more or less perverted than heterosexuality. And the government is involved in marriage because marriage was born as a secular institution that regulated property and family structure.

[Luveria]

When I see an obvious fascist calling themselves a libertarian I'll call them out on what they are.

How am I a fascist? I said before we could allow gay marriage but the govt. should just not recognize it. The gays can have their ceremony with rice, flowers, kisses, rings, etc.. and then go home and have their fun and fights and possibly even divorce in the future. All the good and bad things like normal married couples. The only difference is their marriage should not be recognized by the govt.

Of course, ending govt. recognition of all marriages would make things better (except for divorce lawyers). The gays would actually benefit from my idea. Even better for them, with no recognition of their marriages, a man could marry 100 men and have a harem with no legal consequences.

A fascist would probably send them to jail, hard labor, or death camps. I supported forced reeducation camps for them in the distant past but I no longer do. We shouldn't try to force them to change (although a friendly propaganda campaign encouraging them to change is acceptable).

Why the fuck should heterosexual marriages be recognized and not same-sex marriages? What makes heterosexual marriages so special?

You're ignoring out on the many hundreds of legal marriage benefits, so quit making up bullshit of how it's the same thing when it's not legally recognized.

[Mkuki]

How am I a fascist? I said before we could allow gay marriage but the govt. should just not recognize it. The gays can have their ceremony with rice, flowers, kisses, rings, etc.. and then go home and have their fun and fights and possibly even divorce in the future. All the good and bad things like normal married couples. The only difference is their marriage should not be recognized by the govt.

Of course, ending govt. recognition of all marriages would make things better (except for divorce lawyers). The gays would actually benefit from my idea. Even better for them, with no recognition of their marriages, a man could marry 100 men and have a harem with no legal consequences.

A fascist would probably send them to jail, hard labor, or death camps. I supported forced reeducation camps for them in the distant past but I no longer do. We shouldn't try to force them to change (although a friendly propaganda campaign encouraging them to change is acceptable).

Why the fuck should heterosexual marriages be recognized and not same-sex marriages? What makes heterosexual marriages so special?

You're ignoring out on the many hundreds of legal marriage benefits, so quit making up bullshit of how it's the same thing when it's not legally recognized.

To be fair Freihart has stated his opposition to government recognition of all marriages.

Well that's a fucking joke. Libertarians don't think there should be state laws banning personal relationships.

I don't believe we should ban gay marriage. I just said gay marriage (and any gay relationship) shames the families.

I believe the govt. should get out of marriage entirely. Let marriage be a private ceremony. If a man wants to marry 100 other men that is fine, the govt. shouldn't care either way. Same if a man wants to marry his sister, daughter, or his dog.

Personally, I am against gay marriage and gay relationships but I think they should have the right to this perversion. I just don't understand why we need the govt. involved in marriage at all.

[Geilinor]

How am I a fascist? I said before we could allow gay marriage but the govt. should just not recognize it. The gays can have their ceremony with rice, flowers, kisses, rings, etc.. and then go home and have their fun and fights and possibly even divorce in the future. All the good and bad things like normal married couples. The only difference is their marriage should not be recognized by the govt.

Of course, ending govt. recognition of all marriages would make things better (except for divorce lawyers). The gays would actually benefit from my idea. Even better for them, with no recognition of their marriages, a man could marry 100 men and have a harem with no legal consequences.

A fascist would probably send them to jail, hard labor, or death camps. I supported forced reeducation camps for them in the distant past but I no longer do. We shouldn't try to force them to change (although a friendly propaganda campaign encouraging them to change is acceptable).

Why the fuck should heterosexual marriages be recognized and not same-sex marriages? What makes heterosexual marriages so special?

You're ignoring out on the many hundreds of legal marriage benefits, so quit making up bullshit of how it's the same thing when it's not legally recognized.

Why does every one of these people also advocate the abolition of civil marriage?

[Luveria]

Why the fuck should heterosexual marriages be recognized and not same-sex marriages? What makes heterosexual marriages so special?

You're ignoring out on the many hundreds of legal marriage benefits, so quit making up bullshit of how it's the same thing when it's not legally recognized.

To be fair Freihart has stated his opposition to government recognition of all marriages.

To be fair, please do read what he said.

How am I a fascist? I said before we could allow gay marriage but the govt. should just not recognize it. The gays can have their ceremony with rice, flowers, kisses, rings, etc.. and then go home and have their fun and fights and possibly even divorce in the future. All the good and bad things like normal married couples. The only difference is their marriage should not be recognized by the govt.

[Geilinor]

To be fair Freihart has stated his opposition to government recognition of all marriages.

To be fair, please do read what he said.

How am I a fascist? I said before we could allow gay marriage but the govt. should just not recognize it. The gays can have their ceremony with rice, flowers, kisses, rings, etc.. and then go home and have their fun and fights and possibly even divorce in the future. All the good and bad things like normal married couples. The only difference is their marriage should not be recognized by the govt.

It's in the second paragraph of that post. In his prior posts, he called homosexuality perversion though, so the "Abolish government recognition of marriage" is a red herring.

[Luveria]

Why the fuck should heterosexual marriages be recognized and not same-sex marriages? What makes heterosexual marriages so special?

You're ignoring out on the many hundreds of legal marriage benefits, so quit making up bullshit of how it's the same thing when it's not legally recognized.

Why does every one of these people also advocate the abolition of civil marriage?

Because it's the new edgy way to mask homophobia. "Yes it may be true I am hostile to gay marriage, but what I really want is equality for the gays because I want to abolish marriage for everyone."

[Divided America]

I am harmed by it they need to stop acting like this

[Luveria]

To be fair, please do read what he said.

It's in the second paragraph of that post.

Yes, in the second paragraph. After the first paragraph in which he advocates having unrecognized marriage allowed for gays. Same pattern all the others are doing.

[Geilinor]

Why does every one of these people also advocate the abolition of civil marriage?

Because it's the new edgy way to mask homophobia. "Yes it may be true I am hostile to gay marriage, but what I really want is equality for the gays because I want to abolish marriage for everyone."

I hope politicians don't start using this idiocy next.

[Condunum]

What the modern church says doesn't matter for two shits if they've mistranslated the passage, and they have. That's why there's contention on what the church's position should be, because they're using inaccurate translations.

the Catholics and Orthodox believe that only the Church can interpret scripture correctly, your interpretations of Leviticus, Deuteronomy etc. are invalid in their eyes.

It's the correct position in the eyes of God, or so they believe.

I'm not saying you're wrong there. I'm saying what they think doesn't matter if they can't translate something properly.

[Geilinor]

Yup, and the Orthodox is similar, if not worse. Also, as the Catholics and Orthodox believe that only the Church can interpret scripture correctly, your interpretations of Leviticus, Deuteronomy etc. are invalid in their eyes.

Oh. That sucks. Thank you for correcting me.

Catholic and Orthodox churches are authoritarian. Strictly organized religion tends to be that way. Catholicism and Orthodoxy need to be deregulated.

[Mkuki]

To be fair Freihart has stated his opposition to government recognition of all marriages.

To be fair, please do read what he said.

How am I a fascist? I said before we could allow gay marriage but the govt. should just not recognize it. The gays can have their ceremony with rice, flowers, kisses, rings, etc.. and then go home and have their fun and fights and possibly even divorce in the future. All the good and bad things like normal married couples. The only difference is their marriage should not be recognized by the govt.

I read it. Doesn't change the fact that Freihart opposes what he opposes.