defending your views

[chilipepper]

Can any married person detail exactly how a same-sex marriage "lessens" their own heterosexual marriage?

 

[Tomk80]

You are right about that. No one that is Christian with " old fashioned" values can say so without being labeled a bigot or a hater. It's not enough to disagree but certain groups would have you ousted just for holding to those beliefs.

I've been attacked by the same ones you have I'm sure and I'm amazed at the hypocrisy. Someone's belief that same sex marriage lessens the seriousness of marriage (as another person commented earlier) got one fellow all in a dither. I don't even think the person saying it was making a claim about the legality of same sex marriage but rather his own personal opinion on the matter of same sex marriage being something he personally disagreed with but not necessarily saying it should remain illegal as far as marriage is concerned.

Does it really need to be explained here that the statement that same-sex marriage lessens the "seriousness of marriage" is extremely denigrating to same-sex couples and the love those people feel for one another. As if that love cannot be serious? And that reacting to a statement that denigrates other with anger, scorn and ridicule (like "same sex marriage lessens the seriousness of marriage") is not hypocritical, but rather entirely justified?

 

[bricklayer]

Can any married person detail exactly how a same-sex marriage "lessens" their own heterosexual marriage?

It doesn't "lessen" it, as I understand lessen, any more than calling a shoe a hat lessens hats.
You can call it chicken soup, if you want, but that doesn't change the obvious.
As far as I'm concerned, you should be able to call whatever you want whatever you want, and I will most certainly do the same.

 

[chilipepper]

It doesn't "lessen" it, as I understand lessen, any more than calling a shoe a hat lessens hats.
You can call it chicken soup, if you want, but that doesn't change the obvious.
As far as I'm concerned, you should be able to call whatever you want whatever you want, and I will most certainly do the same.

And that's just fine. But legally, all people should be given the freedom to marry who they want. You don't have to call it married, the government should.

 

[bricklayer]

And that's just fine. But legally, all people should be given the freedom to marry who they want. You don't have to call it married, the government should.

For all of human history, marriage was a legally recognized religious institution.
The government can confer such recognition on such as it will. I will not play along.

The emperor has no clothes.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

I actually think that your statement here is way to mild. Making the statement that gay marriage lessens the seriousness of marriage is so incredibly vile and utterly lacking in compassion, that in my honest opinion the reponse that Storminside deserved was a fist in his face. That he only got ridiculed, being called intolerant and an idiot is a testament to the patience and virtue of his friends.

Are you compassionate? If you are, I'm not sure how punching someone in the face fits into the character trait...

Anyone can believe whatever they want. There will always be people that disagree with you. You can't just go around punching EVERYONE

 

[Gadarene]

Fact is, Liberals are the ones who usually leave the realms of debate and go into Character assasination mode.

The ones who cannot stand it if somebody disagrees with them and the ones who accuse others of being "bigots" all the time.

They also stereotype, lie and misinform about those they are against.

As I've said, all do this, but Liberals seem to get off with doing it, seem to get to say exactly what they want about the groups they dislike, but if a rival thinking group does the same to them, they do a good job in making them like like a group of hateful, ranting bigots.

Liberal minded people have attacked me for my faith and said downright insulting things, but thats "okay", a Christian can say there view gently, only touch an issue and they're all of a sudden a "hateful bigot against freedom"

Liberals, bit by bit are making it culturally "taboo" to disagree with them in anyway.

Liberals stereotype - sure that's not a stereotype in itself?

 

[Tomk80]

Are you compassionate? If you are, I'm not sure how punching someone in the face fits into the character trait...

I am compassionate up to a point. I do not feel the need to show compassion to someone who is not showing compassion him or herself.

I do not feel sorry for a thief getting a prison sentence, even though that person is robbed of his freedom. I also do not feel compassion for the racist who proclaims that "negroes feel better as slaves" and is subsequently kicked in the groin for his remark.

Note that this is not a black and white issue of always showing compassion or never showing it.

Anyone can believe whatever they want. There will always be people that disagree with you. You can't just go around punching EVERYONE

That's a nice straw man of my position you have there. Feel free to return to the discussion when you're done burning it.

I specifically said that I have come across arguments against homosexual marriage that I disagree with, but that are still made in a way that shows compassion. I specifically stated that the argument given as an example in the OP does not belong in that category.

 

[Jro]

If you start punching every bag of tools you're going to get bloody knuckles really quickly.

 

[chilipepper]

For all of human history, marriage was a legally recognized religious institution.
The government can confer such recognition on such as it will. I will not play along.

The emperor has no clothes.

And why do I care how things have been for all of human history? There have been parts of human history where marriage meant one man and seven wives, or an old man and a twelve-year-old, or forced pairings meant to unite families, love or no love. No one is asking you to marry a person of the same sex. Other people just want the freedom to do so, and it doesn't hurt anyone, so that should be allowed.

 

[Dave Ellis]

For all of human history, marriage was a legally recognized religious institution.
The government can confer such recognition on such as it will. I will not play along.

The emperor has no clothes.

Actually, Marriage has not been a religious institution for all of human history... in fact, marriage far predates Christianity and Judaism.

Likewise, from a government point of view, you don't need to follow any particular religion to get married. Therefore, withholding the rights of people because they don't agree with your particular religion is absurd.

Your church should not be forced to marry people it is bigoted against... however, the government should have no such restriction.

 

[Tomk80]

If you start punching every bag of tools you're going to get bloody knuckles really quickly.

That would be another practical (and rather selfish) reason to not give those people the treatment they deserve. There are other moral and practical reasons as well of course, which I already touched upon.

 

[Jro]

That would be another practical (and rather selfish) reason to not give those people the treatment they deserve. There are other moral and practical reasons as well of course, which I already touched upon.

I really don't like being punched in the face. I'm an equal opportunist non face puncher. vv

 

[Tnmusicman]

Whenever I see someone complain about "I can't have old fashioned values without being called a bigot or a hater", for some reason it comes off as "I can't have bigoted or hateful values without being called a bigot or a hater".

Reminds me of a guy I used to work with, who told me one "I'm not racist, I just don't think black men should date white women."

Your example might be true had I said anything about same sex marriage remaining illegal in most states but I think I clearly stated I don't believe in same sex marriage but I don't believe in getting into others bedrooms (meaning their relationship is none of my business).You can translate that anyway YOU like but I know what my stance on the matter is. If you choose to interpret it as racist,bigoted,ect .... then feel free but its you that will come across as the schmo by inferring something that isn't true.

 

[Tnmusicman]

Does it really need to be explained here that the statement that same-sex marriage lessens the "seriousness of marriage" is extremely denigrating to same-sex couples and the love those people feel for one another. As if that love cannot be serious? And that reacting to a statement that denigrates other with anger, scorn and ridicule (like "same sex marriage lessens the seriousness of marriage") is not hypocritical, but rather entirely justified?

I don't believe the person said anything about the love not being serious but rather the sanctity of conventional marriage which seems to be what was implied. Of course, I may be putting words in the original posters mouth here so that's all I will say on the matter.

 

[Tomk80]

I don't believe the person said anything about the love not being serious but rather the sanctity of conventional marriage which seems to be what was implied. Of course, I may be putting words in the original posters mouth here so that's all I will say on the matter.

His literal words in the OP are that same-sex marriage "lessens the seriousness of marriage". I do not know how to otherwise interpret that statement than the love of these people not being serious. At the very least this is very strongly implied.

 

[Ken-1122]

Examples please of liberals?

I would consider post #32 is an example of a person with liberal views being intolerant of other views

K

 

[TheyCallMeDave]

Do you ever find that if you try to defend your views against liberals they jump on you, complaining that you are intolerant, while they themselves are totally intolerant of your views?

Someone asked my opinion on gay marriage and I said that I didn't agree with it, as it lessens the seriousness of marriage and isn't good for society. Of course everyone jumped down my throat and had a huge go at me and ridiculed me, calling me intolerant, juvenile and an idiot.

Does anyone else feel wary of sharing their unfashionable views?

No...i dont feel like shrinking back from sharing my Biblical Views on issues , because it is wrong to be manipulated into keeping quiet on immoral and unethical lifestyles and ideologies that set themselves up against Christ. Its all part of being persecuted for the cause of Christ ..and theres nothing more liberal-Amoralists would like than not to be challenged and opposed ; in fact, the primary agenda is to have everyone be tolerant of whatever THEY want to do and if you go against the grain then suddenly youve become 'a Bigot' , 'Intolerant', and a (rediculously misapplied) 'Phobe' . Im pleased to wear that label if thats what it takes . Its high-time Christians started flexing their muscle toward anti-Godly philosophies of our time.

In fact, i wish a couple of highly vocal / proactive National Christian Leaders would gather Christian Troops together from around the Nation to wage a war on the perverted / reprobated minded issues of our day. Christians arent supposed to be weak-willed ; they are supposed to have courage , vision with necessary action , love, power, and be of a sound mind. The Christian Community has become too nice and too tolerant nowadays.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

I am compassionate up to a point. I do not feel the need to show compassion to someone who is not showing compassion him or herself.

I do not feel sorry for a thief getting a prison sentence, even though that person is robbed of his freedom. I also do not feel compassion for the racist who proclaims that "negroes feel better as slaves" and is subsequently kicked in the groin for his remark.

Note that this is not a black and white issue of always showing compassion or never showing it.

I bet the thief wouldn't mind punching you in the face, eh?

That's a nice straw man of my position you have there. Feel free to return to the discussion when you're done burning it.

I wasn't being serious, hence the "". No need to start calling "logical fallacy" on me.

I specifically said that I have come across arguments against homosexual marriage that I disagree with, but that are still made in a way that shows compassion. I specifically stated that the argument given as an example in the OP does not belong in that category.

I dont find his example to be particularly mean-spirited. He has a position that says that he is not in support of legalizing gay marriage because of two reasons:

1) It lessens the seriousness of marriage
2) It is not good for society

He's just stating an opinion about GAY MARRIAGE. He isn't saying gays are evil or should be shot or don't deserve our respect, his opinion is on that of the definition of marriage and what it represents as an institution.

I'm not sure why you responded the way you did. You essentially confirmed the OP's premise: he states his opinion and then people jump down his throat and ridicule him before he even has a chance to explain or justify his opinions.

 

[Tomk80]

I dont find his example to be particularly mean-spirited. He has a position that says that he is not in support of legalizing gay marriage because of two reasons:

1) It lessens the seriousness of marriage
2) It is not good for society

He's just stating an opinion about GAY MARRIAGE. He isn't saying gays are evil or should be shot or don't deserve our respect, his opinion is on that of the definition of marriage and what it represents as an institution.

I'm not sure why you responded the way you did. You essentially confirmed the OP's premise: he states his opinion and then people jump down his throat and ridicule him before he even has a chance to explain or justify his opinions.

And I already explained this. Reason one pretends that the love two gay people feel for each other is somehow not serious. This is offensive, utterly lacking in compassion and seriously denigrating towards gays and lesbian couples. People should jump down his throat for it.