What is your opinion on LGBT+ marriage?

[Christenmark]

it is the inspired inherent word of god, and the accumulated knowledge of many millennia of human civilization, you will have to prove your point to me before I take you for granted, when against this, you nor I could ever be in a position to judge the highest THE builder. you are a fool to assume that you are wiser than those of the past simply because it is now and that was then

Rob Bell, great author - many good books - I think you'd learn a thing or two reading his book What Is the Bible? How an Ancient Library of Poems, Letters, and Stories Can Transform the Way You Think and Feel About Everything. It really overwhelmed and blew me away.

I evaluated my faith too, I was once upon a time, a more atheistic individual.

[The New California Republic]

I have been thinking hard about my own positions for a good three years, and I started out as a pro-LGBT marriage, pro-abortion, and pro-socialist stance, I was appauled by the true nature of some of these thigns and abandoned them until I had a set that werent internally conflicting. Now I have grown into a traditionalist, socially conservative, semi-libertarian, Pro-life, and anti-socialist, in my standings.

Cool story bro, just don't see the relevance of your life story here.

[Kannap]

Why can't I get married in a church?

-A Christian

Because you shouldn’t force a church that’s against marrying you to do it. There’s such a thing as freedom of religion. Which should be respected. However, there are churches that do perform same sex marriages, you can go to one of them at least.

He was making a very vague statement about how homosexuals shouldn't try to get married at churches. I made a very vague question in response.

I'm not going to force anybody to wed me if they don't want to, but I'm absolutely going to get married in a church and my pastor is the person I intend to ask to officiate the marriage.

[Andsed]

Why can't I get married in a church?

-A Christian

Because you shouldn’t force a church that’s against marrying you to do it. There’s such a thing as freedom of religion. Which should be respected. However, there are churches that do perform same sex marriages, you can go to one of them at least.

Besides why would you want to associate yourself with those who discriminate against people based off the baseless nonsense that homosexuality is wrong?

[Genivaria]

It's a union of people who want to dedicate their lives to each other, the qualifier of 'LGBT+' changes nothing.

[Christenmark]

I have been thinking hard about my own positions for a good three years, and I started out as a pro-LGBT marriage, pro-abortion, and pro-socialist stance, I was appauled by the true nature of some of these thigns and abandoned them until I had a set that werent internally conflicting. Now I have grown into a traditionalist, socially conservative, semi-libertarian, Pro-life, and anti-socialist, in my standings.

Cool story bro, just don't see the relevance of your life story here.

to stress the fact that his staunchness is a possible positive, but only if it is upon the grounds of internal consistency, and I do not see anything of the sort here. I know that the life story criticism is to dismiss my personal experiences, but give it enough time one of you will do the same thing with: 'how could you ever know you are straight' or something of that vein.

[Kannap]

I mean, you're not affording me the courtesy you claim I'm not affording you - Guess its a two way street.

I understand that you think that the words of the founding documents are to be interpreted by the views of the now, not of what the meaning was when they were written

I understand you think the Constitution apparently doesn't apply to multiple facets of our society, e.g. Supreme Court decisions since the writing of the Constitution, but then you must surely be telling me the Constitution is an outdated document that has no value or power in the modern day. Pick one or the other, please.

I don't read Plato and assume he is calling for the Facist ethnostate subliminally just because I can do mental gymnastics to create my own delusion

Bad comparison, unless every Supreme Court justice to ever serve in the Supreme Court has been an Olympic gymnast creation their delusional dystopian society.

[Kannap]

Considering you'd probably have to invite two gay guys with the express communicated knowledge that they were allowed to have sex in your living room for that scenario to happen, then you probably wouldn't care.

Well that's the point, I wouldn't do that, so if it happened it would be without express knowledge or permission.

So it wouldn't happen and the point is moot.

[Kannap]

Rob Bell, great author - many good books - I think you'd learn a thing or two reading his book What Is the Bible? How an Ancient Library of Poems, Letters, and Stories Can Transform the Way You Think and Feel About Everything. It really overwhelmed and blew me away.

I evaluated my faith too, I was once upon a time, a more atheistic individual.

Not sure what this response means in context to what I said.

[Munkcestrian Republic]

those are called heretical

What denomination do you belong to?

I suggest you do the same thing hypocrite

I've seen people claim it's about philosophers, I've seen people claim it's about Gnostics. While I am sympathetic to Gnosticism, I'm not however an outright Gnostic. So it doesn't really apply to me - assuming that interpretation of Romans 1:22 is correct, of course.

it is the inspired inherent word of god, and the accumulated knowledge of many millennia of human civilization, you will have to prove your point to me before I take you for granted, when against this, you nor I could ever be in a position to judge the highest THE builder. you are a fool to assume that you are wiser than those of the past simply because it is now and that was then

The Bible is the result of different "Church Fathers" deciding that they liked certain texts and didn't like others.

Hello, just making sure I'm not being ignored

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Because you shouldn’t force a church that’s against marrying you to do it. There’s such a thing as freedom of religion. Which should be respected. However, there are churches that do perform same sex marriages, you can go to one of them at least.

He was making a very vague statement about how homosexuals shouldn't try to get married at churches. I made a very vague question in response.

I'm not going to force anybody to wed me if they don't want to, but I'm absolutely going to get married in a church and my pastor is the person I intend to ask to officiate the marriage.

Good, but my point here is (taking your vague question) that if we are to truly be egalitarian, churches that refuse to marry same sex couples are in their protected right to refuse. It’s good that your pastor agrees to marry same sex couples. I think that’s very forward and loving of him to. But if we want equality of rights, neither your right to marry nor their right to refuse to marry you should be taken for granted. I think some people fail to remember that.

[The New California Republic]

Cool story bro, just don't see the relevance of your life story here.

to stress the fact that his staunchness is a possible positive, but only if it is upon the grounds of internal consistency, and I do not see anything of the sort here.

How is LGBT marriage not internally consistent?

I know that the life story criticism is to dismiss my personal experiences, but give it enough time one of you will do the same thing with: 'how could you ever know you are straight' or something of that vein.

...the hell are you talking about?

[Telconi]

Well that's the point, I wouldn't do that, so if it happened it would be without express knowledge or permission.

So it wouldn't happen and the point is moot.

... you realize it was a joke right?

[Kannap]

Cool story bro, just don't see the relevance of your life story here.

to stress the fact that his staunchness is a possible positive, but only if it is upon the grounds of internal consistency, and I do not see anything of the sort here. I know that the life story criticism is to dismiss my personal experiences, but give it enough time one of you will do the same thing with: 'how could you ever know you are straight' or something of that vein.

What are you rambling on about?

[Christenmark]

I understand you think the Constitution apparently doesn't apply to multiple facets of our society, e.g. Supreme Court decisions since the writing of the Constitution, but then you must surely be telling me the Constitution is an outdated document that has no value or power in the modern day. Pick one or the other, please.

Bad comparison, unless every Supreme Court justice to ever serve in the Supreme Court has been an Olympic gymnast creation their delusional dystopian society.

okay, I will continue this discussion later if you would like, perhaps on a more accommodating forum, discord perhaps? because I enjoy this dialogue but I feel this is getting a bit messy in terms of replies to things posted during the typing of an earlier response. is that fine?

[West Leas Oros 2]

This OP be a bit bloggy, IMO

[The New California Republic]

to stress the fact that his staunchness is a possible positive, but only if it is upon the grounds of internal consistency, and I do not see anything of the sort here. I know that the life story criticism is to dismiss my personal experiences, but give it enough time one of you will do the same thing with: 'how could you ever know you are straight' or something of that vein.

What are you rambling on about?

Fuck knows. It just looks like noise to give the appearance of an answer where there really isn't one.

[Munkcestrian Republic]

I am only doing this because I am the only one with enough brain cells left in my age group where I live to even care about this kind of stuff, and thus I never am able to express and grow my ideas with their input as they have no input nor care to give. I enjoy this here because I can understand your position - without having to agree to it, sure - while rationalizing my own. but I feel I am not being afforded the same courtesy and I am alright if you do not, but I am sad that I won't get the full value of this as a dialogue.

"I'm smart, unlike everyone else my age "

[Kannap]

He was making a very vague statement about how homosexuals shouldn't try to get married at churches. I made a very vague question in response.

I'm not going to force anybody to wed me if they don't want to, but I'm absolutely going to get married in a church and my pastor is the person I intend to ask to officiate the marriage.

Good, but my point here is (taking your vague question) that if we are to truly be egalitarian, churches that refuse to marry same sex couples are in their protected right to refuse. It’s good that your pastor agrees to marry same sex couples. I think that’s very forward and loving of him to. But if we want equality of rights, neither your right to marry nor their right to refuse to marry you should be taken for granted. I think some people fail to remember that.

I fully agree, the vague statement and question were both poor ways of stating both of our points and we could have come to some better understanding sooner if we'd been more detailed rather than vague.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Because you shouldn’t force a church that’s against marrying you to do it. There’s such a thing as freedom of religion. Which should be respected. However, there are churches that do perform same sex marriages, you can go to one of them at least.

Besides why would you want to associate yourself with those who discriminate against people based off the baseless nonsense that homosexuality is wrong?

For some, gay or not, their religion is very important. I myself am bi and I wouldn’t want to force anyone who disagrees with my way of living to do something that’s against their convictions. When I got married, I went for a civil union.

That being said, I don’t think religious people should interfere with civil unions or laws that protect LGBT+ people.

[Kannap]

Bad comparison, unless every Supreme Court justice to ever serve in the Supreme Court has been an Olympic gymnast creation their delusional dystopian society.

okay, I will continue this discussion later if you would like, perhaps on a more accommodating forum, discord perhaps? because I enjoy this dialogue but I feel this is getting a bit messy in terms of replies to things posted during the typing of an earlier response. is that fine?

You may see Discord as a "more accommodating forum," I see it as the opposite. This is a public forum, we have others present to share in the discussion. This is a rich place to debate.

[Munkcestrian Republic]

semi-libertarian

lol

anti-socialist

"anti-helping people", more likely.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Good, but my point here is (taking your vague question) that if we are to truly be egalitarian, churches that refuse to marry same sex couples are in their protected right to refuse. It’s good that your pastor agrees to marry same sex couples. I think that’s very forward and loving of him to. But if we want equality of rights, neither your right to marry nor their right to refuse to marry you should be taken for granted. I think some people fail to remember that.

I fully agree, the vague statement and question were both poor ways of stating both of our points and we could have come to some better understanding sooner if we'd been more detailed rather than vague.

It’s ok. This is a heated topic. I just wanted to make my own point clearer.

[Tankmen]

I mean, you're not affording me the courtesy you claim I'm not affording you - Guess its a two way street.

I understand that you think that the words of the founding documents are to be interpreted by the views of the now, not of what the meaning was when they were written, I don't read Plato and assume he is calling for the Facist ethnostate subliminally just because I can do mental gymnastics to create my own delusion, you are of a stalwart mind and that is a good trait, but not when it is so much so that it will do mental gymnastics to do so. I have been thinking hard about my own positions for a good three years, and I started out as a pro-LGBT marriage, pro-abortion, and pro-socialist stance, I was appauled by the true nature of some of these thigns and abandoned them until I had a set that werent internally conflicting. Now I have grown into a traditionalist, socially conservative, semi-libertarian, Pro-life, and anti-socialist, in my standings.

So a generic right-wing conservative fakertarian. All that's missing is the white nationalism.

[Christenmark]

I am only doing this because I am the only one with enough brain cells left in my age group where I live to even care about this kind of stuff, and thus I never am able to express and grow my ideas with their input as they have no input nor care to give. I enjoy this here because I can understand your position - without having to agree to it, sure - while rationalizing my own. but I feel I am not being afforded the same courtesy and I am alright if you do not, but I am sad that I won't get the full value of this as a dialogue.

"I'm smart, unlike everyone else my age "

no I know I am just as stupid and want them to grow their understanding as well, but they don't seem to, sans a very small group of individuals who I have distanced myself from as they began to not really like discussing this stuff with me after I began to alter my outlook. I did not intend to be so high-horsy, but I get very irritated with their apathy to this kind of stuff, and I guess I got a bit carried away