Looks like Bush won ...

Inner · Post by **Inner** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:16 pm

Codemonger: Interesting seams to be a common trate when people converse with me too, they instantly jump to the conclusion that, because I am agist ' Gay/Lesbian ' or ' Abortion ' in there entireity that, if I saw/heard of someone doing such a thing I'd take great pleasure in driving an Axe into there skull, which is not the case at all!, the secret is which very few people are privy to is, I seporated what God defines as a sin, from the person. in simple terms; (infact there isn't a word in the english language that allows the discription of how vile I see sin) but, I hate the sin, and love the 'person', and I classify myself in that too.

GedB wrote:
How does allowing gay marriages force values upon you or your family?
There are some determining factors on why a person(s) might thing it would;
A ) Immoral
B ) Christian
C ) Perant
There are probably more determining factors of why, but lets take one those for example; B+C, a perant rasing his/her children wants to bring them up properly with the values from there beliefs, from what they define as moral and right behavior. A child will look at these things with total confusion, on one hand his parents will be teaching him/her about how immoral it is, and how God distoryed 2 citys in the Bible because just such an activitiy (Sodem & Gomora [spelling my be incorrect]), they'll also be teaching the values of marriage that it is a holy union between a man and (A) woman, then on the other hand, you have the world telling them that it's okay for a man and a (shudder) man to do the same thing, the more the media makes a noise about it the hard it gets for perants to do there job esp. Christian ones.

GedB wrote:
Bill and Susan in HappyHampton re living the heterosexual dream, married since high school and still in love at 60. Will and Joel over in San Francisco get married, how is Bill and Susan affected, exactly?

As said above is the couple Bill & Susan marriage under the belief that it is holy, and not the be defiled.. they both will see it as a grave injustice belittling and insulting the union they made.

GedB · Post by **GedB** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 2:13 pm

Inner,

For the Muslim the drinking of alcahol and (shudder) the eating of pig flesh are unthinkable.

Should these also be made illegal, so that good Muslims are not subjected to the knowledge that such depraved consumption is taking place?

Inner · Post by **Inner** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 3:47 pm

GedB wrote:Inner,

For the Muslim the drinking of alcahol and (shudder) the eating of pig flesh are unthinkable.

Should these also be made illegal, so that good Muslims are not subjected to the knowledge that such depraved consumption is taking place?

When was the last time you saw a mob of Muslims matching down the street protesting that?

Thing is, while they may think the world should not partake in such consumption, the don't go around making a big deal out of it, and there are aproximately 3billion Muslims there very much in the majority in a global sence.

GedB · Post by **GedB** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 6:29 pm

Say an Islamic nation with a 20% christian population decided to ban all uses of alcahol.

This would include the use of Wine as the body of christ in the christian service.

This would not be the muslims imposing their values on the christians.

However, if the christians demanded that they be allowed to use the wine for their sacrement, then they would be imposing their values on the muslims?

Codemonger · Post by **Codemonger** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 7:05 pm

Sorry guys have to post, but just wan't to make a couple comments and not debate the issue. Food for thought. Some pedophile in BC (British Columbia, province in Canada) was arrested and charged a couple years ago for molestation, anyway the dude was also taking images of children and putting them on naked bodies, and drawing cartoons of him doing stuff to young children. Well the judge ended up ruling that he was off the hook for this stuff because of freedom of expression etc.. Well not surprising overwhelmingly Canadian public was very disgusted and couldn't understand morally how the judge could do this ...

Because a judge decided that this persons freedom of expression were violated does that make it a case for the legislature to pass a law supporting freedom of expression to draw pornography of little children does it ? Does the judges ruling make it ethically and morally alright ?

The point I'm trying to make, is that you could apply someones rights being trampled over in almost any case in the world, even in child pornography as my above example does. The case you are making about gay marriage is purely a legal case of someone saying that their rights are trampled, morally, well you'll just have to poll the public.

Just because the law interprets it this way, this does not mean that what the person wan't is morally or ethically right. This is usally where the public tends to step in, and if the public is majority cahtolic, christian, etc.. then maybe that person should move to another Country and run for politican, get the support they need, and pass a law for what they wan't there...

If you make your case to the public that gay marriage is morally correct it will overwhelmingly loose. If you make the case as purely a legal issue, you have ground, but remeber then this brings up the legal issue of father/daughter marriage, and brother/sister etc, the list could go on forever.

So if you understand this concept, you should understand that your case has no moral merits, and morals issues are not what courts decide. Please do not undermine general peoples morale values, it only creates resentment, to think you are superior because you have legally made an argument is so, so , what the word : LIBERAL

Also a legal solution is Civil Unions, which have not been embraced by Gay activist groups, very strange.

the.weavster · Post by **the.weavster** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:00 pm

On a physchological note, when political issues of a sexual nature are brought up, people tend to take a personal stance and feel like their personal rights are being taken away.

It's not personal to me, I'm not gay neither do I have any close friends or family who are, but I think all citizens should be equal under law in a free society.

One great and fantastic thing about Canada is in general we don't have people like you, we can actually speak our mind and not be persecuted

You're the persecutor not the persecutee.

GedB · Post by **GedB** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:35 am

Codemonger,

I am so, so LIBERAL, and proud of it.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=liberal

Why would the relationship between father/daughter and brother/sister need legal recognition? The family ties are already well founded in law. The example of brother/sister is an interesting one, since Abraham's wife, Sarai, was his half sister. If we are to use the Bible as the model for marriage, then this sets a much stronger precedent.

I'm not getting the link between this and pedophilia. If the catholic clergy is anything to go by then denying marriage is not very effective for preventing pedophilia.

Inner · Post by **Inner** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 11:29 am

GedB wrote:Codemonger,

I am so, so LIBERAL, and proud of it.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=liberal

Why would the relationship between father/daughter and brother/sister need legal recognition? The family ties are already well founded in law. The example of brother/sister is an interesting one, since Abraham's wife, Sarai, was his half sister. If we are to use the Bible as the model for marriage, then this sets a much stronger precedent.

I'm not getting the link between this and pedophilia. If the catholic clergy is anything to go by then denying marriage is not very effective for preventing pedophilia.

The link, my dear friend is this. if you legalise gay/lesbian marrage, where does it end, in other words at what point do we finally draw a line in the sand and say here and no futher.

blueznl · Post by **blueznl** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 11:31 am

inner, i'm dutch, and we are about legalizing *anything*

as long as we can put some form of tax on it...

freedimension · Post by **freedimension** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 2:07 pm

Inner wrote: The link, my dear friend is this. if you legalise gay/lesbian marrage, where does it end, in other words at what point do we finally draw a line in the sand and say here and no futher.

Stop as soon as it would hurt other people physically or it is against the human rights.
Don't stop if it only hurts the feelings of some narrowminded people that think that they are normal, the standard.

But please, go on and show us some examples of where it could lead us to legalize gay marriages! Then all of us can judge if your opinion is reasonable.

To be normal can be sooooo boring *yawn*

GedB · Post by **GedB** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 2:47 pm

I resolve never to discuss religion, morality or politics on the net again.

Num3 · Post by **Num3** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 5:29 pm

GedB wrote:I resolve never to discuss religion, morality or politics on the net again.

Don't forget football (soccer for you aliens)

Psychophanta · Post by **Psychophanta** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 5:56 pm

GedB wrote:I resolve never to discuss religion, morality or politics on the net again.

Oh!, Why not. It is in fact another adult entertainment matter

Inner · Post by **Inner** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:27 am

here is an interesting read;
http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41368

ricardo · Post by **ricardo** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:59 am

GedB wrote:Rings,

Free tits are already distributed to 50% of the population.

It hardly seems fair, since this is the half of the population who don't really appreicate them. And they get two each!

Only two???