Pope: Saving world from homosexuality like saving rainforests

[angellica]

The only time I've ever seen anything in the Bible about heterosexuality, it is negative. Why would God call an abomination something in His image?

Again, Ollie, what verse?

 

[angellica]

How, exactly, does allowing gay marriage change what marriage "is and means"? Why does your (future) marriage suddenly become something else if same sex couples can get married? How does my marriage (done without any mention of any deities - as I believe religion is private) suddenly lose its meaning if my sister could legally marry her girlfriend (if they decide to marry)?

From what I said earlier, and because I'm lazy:

Marriage is one of the foundations of our society. There would be a shift in society and the way they view family and marriage if we are to change the core definition of it. It would be ingrained on my future (possibly) kids as an acceptable way of life. It would be more prominently displayed and accepted. There's no need to change it, in my opinion, so if I were to vote on it I would vote against gay marriage.

 

[b&wpac4]

Which still supports what I said - mine doesn't matter any more than yours.

Well, I think mine matters a great deal more, but that's for a completely different debate.

 

[angellica]

I could not find a comprehensive list quickly, but here is a list I did find:

I see a bunch of insurance stuff in there. THAT will affect taxes and maybe even how much insurance I have to pay or how much coverage I'll get if they get all those added benefits. So there is a reason for not doing it. Why do they need benefits? I am single and I have benefits because I WORK. If they want some insurance, why not get a job or marry somebody of the opposite sex?

 

[Aianna]

"over 1000 rights" - that must be one of the main talking points on the "gay agenda" .

Seriously though, what are all of these rights?

http://www.buddybuddy.com/gao-2003.pdf

There's an 18 page PDF file which lists the federal benefits as of 2003. The exact number is 1049 and this does not factor in state laws.

 

[angellica]

Well, I think mine matters a great deal more, but that's for a completely different debate.

Well of course everyone thinks theirs is the most important or is right, but no one else does (cause they are too busy thinking their own is more important).

 

[b&wpac4]

Well of course everyone thinks theirs is the most important or is right, but no one else does (cause they are too busy thinking their own is more important).

Of course!

I see a bunch of insurance stuff in there. THAT will affect taxes and maybe even how much insurance I have to pay or how much coverage I'll get if they get all those added benefits. So there is a reason for not doing it. Why do they need benefits? I am single and I have benefits because I WORK. If they want some insurance, why not get a job or marry somebody of the opposite sex?

Well, why not get rid of all marriage benefits then? Then we don't have to pay for anything else, because we LOVE MONEY so much, right?

 

[Nihilismus]

I see a bunch of insurance stuff in there. THAT will affect taxes and maybe even how much insurance I have to pay or how much coverage I'll get if they get all those added benefits. So there is a reason for not doing it. Why do they need benefits? I am single and I have benefits because I WORK.

This is an argument against marriage in general.

You are yet to explain what is so detrimental to society about a relationship between two penises or two vaginas.

 

[angellica]

This is an argument against marriage in general.

You are yet to explain what is so detrimental to society about a relationship between two penises or two vaginas.

Like I said before, the stuff about how it would be more generally accepted and viewed as a legitimate "family." I realize some people agree with that, but some don't. So to me, it would be detrimental to me and my future kids if I have any. I don't want them in that kind of environment. You may disagree with my reasoning, but it's just what I believe, nothing more and nothing less.

 

[WatersMoon110]

Well, why not get rid of all marriage benefits then? Then we don't have to pay for anything else, because we LOVE MONEY so much, right?

Well, that at least would be fair. Sort of sucky for me, but fair.

I think we should just make everything "Civil Union". And I think we should make all old marriages invalid - so that people would have to get a new "Civil Union License". I'd even be willing to get one myself, and pay for it again (at least I wouldn't have to go through changing my name again - that was a bit of a hassle).

If the people being Prop 8 had really felt that "marriage" was a special religious word, they would have been trying to change legal marriage in the State of California to be called "Civil Union".

 

[Nihilismus]

You may disagree with my reasoning, but it's just what I believe, nothing more and nothing less.

What reasoning?

 

[b&wpac4]

Like I said before, the stuff about how it would be more generally accepted and viewed as a legitimate "family." I realize some people agree with that, but some don't. So to me, it would be detrimental to me and my future kids if I have any. I don't want them in that kind of environment. You may disagree with my reasoning, but it's just what I believe, nothing more and nothing less.

Your argument really then boils down to "I don't like it"?

 

[WatersMoon110]

Like I said before, the stuff about how it would be more generally accepted and viewed as a legitimate "family." I realize some people agree with that, but some don't. So to me, it would be detrimental to me and my future kids if I have any. I don't want them in that kind of environment. You may disagree with my reasoning, but it's just what I believe, nothing more and nothing less.

Just because something is legal doesn't mean you have to teach your children that it is okay. Any adult over the age of 21 can drink until they pass out (in their home) - but I bet you will teach your children that it isn't good to do that. Any consenting adults can have premarital sex with one another - but you wouldn't teach your kids that it was acceptable to do that.

Just because something is legal doesn't mean you can't go on disliking it. You will still be able to teach your (future) children that homosexuality is "wrong" and a "choice".

So I don't really see how that is a very good argument against legal unions for same sex couples.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

Look at how society has changed their (society's) views on gays in the past 10 years or so. Gay marriage will further this change, and I do not believe it is a healthy change. People can express their love however they want, I don't care. I just don't want to change the definition of marriage. I don't want to change what marriage is and what it means. I don't see any reason.

It is not your choice to make, your marriage can be any way you want it but leave others the same courtesy to choose how they view theirs. There are open marriages, marriages of convenience, marriages for tax purposes and many other marriages that would not fit yor idea of marriage yet they are the marriage those people choose.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

I think sex lives should be "hidden" or private. I don't want to hear about it.

So when heterosexual people get married it has nothing to do with you hearing about sex but that changes when it is homosexual people, where does this "logic" come from?

 

[angellica]

Your argument really then boils down to "I don't like it"?

No, although I don't like it, I also don't view it as a positive change for society, I think it is wrong, and I don't think it should be condoned.

 

[angellica]

So when heterosexual people get married it has nothing to do with you hearing about sex but that changes when it is homosexual people, where does this "logic" come from?

I don't want to hear about any of their sex lives.

 

[angellica]

It is not your choice to make, your marriage can be any way you want it but leave others the same courtesy to choose how they view theirs. There are open marriages, marriages of convenience, marriages for tax purposes and many other marriages that would not fit yor idea of marriage yet they are the marriage those people choose.

Just because there's other marriages that I don't agree with doesn't make gay marriage okay. Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[b&wpac4]

No, although I don't like it, I also don't view it as a positive change for society, I think it is wrong, and I don't think it should be condoned.

So... you don't like it. You don't show how it is bad, or how it will be a negative change, or why it will harm us.

 

[OphidiaPhile]

The difference is that being gay is a choice and is wrong.

Science and Psychology have determined that is biological and not a choice but your belief is that they are wrong and you are right, what justification do you have for that assertion? Do you typically not believe in science because I do not grasp how a layperson can discount the findings of a majority of experts in their field.

Being black is genetic and not wrong. Feel free to disagree on gay being a choice/being wrong, but I am simply telling you MY belief

A belief with no justification is just a guess

I'm not here to argue whether it's right or wrong, because that's not the topic. The topic is WHY I or the church disagrees with gay marriage more than they disagree with, say, other religions practicing their beliefs.

So why must you do more than just disagree but actively seek to deny others of their rights?