Pope: Saving world from homosexuality like saving rainforests

[angellica]

It may not be hate but is not far from it.

It may actually be more closer to love than you think. By condoning it, I'd be remiss in my duty as a Christian to practice my beliefs and uphold them. If even one person sees the error of their ways because of this, it would be worth it. It's "tough love" in a way.

 

[WatersMoon110]

Actually quite the opposite is true they have found that those most likely to abuse alcohol are those that do not grow up with it as a normal part of life.

I thought the children of alcoholics were more likely than them? I believe that children who grow up with responsible drinkers are less likely to abuse alcohol than both of them, though.

 

[TheBear]

Hey I'm watching the Pope right now. They're putting on a show for Christmas at St Peter's Basilica. I didn't notice any women as part of the choir, just men and young boys.

Which made me think....

It would have been nice had the Pope made a statement along the lines of - "Saving humanity from pedophile clergy is just as important as saving the rainforests."

 

[angellica]

I don't agree that you should be able to dictate to them how to live their lives and what rights they are afforded in the country they have just as much right to be in as you.

They have the same right as me - to marry someone of the opposite sex. Whether they want to act on that right or not is up to them.

 

[Garyzenuf]

Being exposed to drinking a lot, being encouraged to try drinking, desensitization to alcohol in general, acceptance of having a casual drink as okay and normal, access to alcohol in the home, etc.

None of which would "make" anyone an alcoholic.

A heavy drinker, "life" of the party maybe, but alcoholic, Uh uh.

*

 

[angellica]

None of which would "make" anyone an alcoholic.

A heavy drinker, "life" of the party maybe, but alcoholic, Uh uh.

*

Contribute to them becoming an alcoholic, along with a genetic pre-disposition.

 

[angellica]

It is sentimental nonsense in response to sentimental nonsense. You should be able to relate.

Mine was more on the lines of morals and beliefs, not getting all sentimental and crying.

 

[b&wpac4]

They have the same right as me - to marry someone of the opposite sex. Whether they want to act on that right or not is up to them.

I HATE this argument more than anything else any of your side comes up with. The blacks could marry other blacks, what was their problem?! They should have just been happy and shut up, oh, and sat at the back of the bus because I NEED MY FRONT SEAT I AM MORE IMPORTANT.

 

[Aianna]

They have the same right as me - to marry someone of the opposite sex. Whether they want to act on that right or not is up to them.

That's like saying people born to Muslim parents in Saudi Arabia but believe (for example) Christianity have the right to worship Allah the same as everyone else (as it is against the law to convert from Islam).

The entire point is that they don't have the right to marry the person they love.

 

[geekgirlkelli]

Wait a sec! LOL...

A straight is complaining that one partner of a gay couple being able to put their partner on their insurance policy is going to make their (the straight complaining about this) insurance premiums go up? Did I read that correctly?

And then they said the other partner should either get a job or marry someone of the opposite sex? Did I read this correctly? Why yes, yes I did. Hahahahahahahahahaha! That is really funny.

OK first... Hetero Christians are the ones who typically think the moral and good thing to do is for the wife to stay home and pop kids out left and right.

So please -- do explain -- how on earth a gay couple is going to raise your premiums more than a hetero couple with the husband working and the wife at home raising six kids.

Really! Explain. Please. Don't dodge this time. I really want to know the answer to this. A reasonable, logical answer, not some BS dodge or no response at all like I usually get.

 

[Nihilismus]

Mine was more on the lines of morals and beliefs, not getting all sentimental and crying.

Same thing.

 

[angellica]

I HATE this argument more than anything else any of your side comes up with. The blacks could marry other blacks, what was their problem?! They should have just been happy and shut up, oh, and sat at the back of the bus because I NEED MY FRONT SEAT I AM MORE IMPORTANT.

The point is, it's not discrimination. The black/white thing was racial. This is a basic definition of marriage - a man and a woman. It's not discriminating against anyone. It's a right that you can choose not to take advantage of.

 

[angellica]

Same thing.

When you cry because you are sad, is it because of something moral that you believe is wrong? No, morals are different than emotions.

 

[Aianna]

The point is, it's not discrimination. The black/white thing was racial. This is a basic definition of marriage - a man and a woman. It's not discriminating against anyone. It's a right that you can choose not to take advantage of.

The "basic definition of marriage" used to be "a man and a woman of the same race."

I'm sorry, but it's exactly the same; the anti-homosexual marriage arguments are even identical to the anti-interracial marriage arguments.

 

[geekgirlkelli]

They have the same right as me - to marry someone of the opposite sex. Whether they want to act on that right or not is up to them.

LOL, you know, your purposeful obtusity is really something.

 

[KCKID]

Again, Ollie, what verse?

Hmmm ...while I'm sure that Ollie will speak for himself when he comes online I can only assume that he means that 'heterosexuality' is generally only referenced in the Bible in a 'no-no' manner ...i.e. in regard to sexual sins. It never seems to actually 'promote' heterosexuality in a positive way per se.

 

[angellica]

The "basic definition of marriage" used to be "a man and a woman of the same race."

I'm sorry, but it's exactly the same; the anti-homosexual marriage arguments are even identical to the anti-interracial marriage arguments.

No, because there was never any argument that being black was a choice. There are many people who believe that being gay is a choice, and their decision to oppose gay marriage is based partly on that. So it's not the same.

 

[angellica]

Hmmm ...while I'm sure that Ollie will speak for himself when he comes online I can only assume that he means that 'heterosexuality' is generally only referenced in the Bible in a 'no-no' manner ...i.e. in regard to sexual sins. It never seems to actually 'promote' heterosexuality in a positive way per se.

Have you read Song of Solomon?

 

[WatersMoon110]

They have the same right as me - to marry someone of the opposite sex. Whether they want to act on that right or not is up to them.

They are not allowed to legally marry the consenting adult they love - but you will be able to, because you are straight.

When Christianity was illegal, in Rome while the Gospels were being written, everyone had the "same right" to worship any Roman gods (or those adopted into the Roman pantheon at different points) and the Caesar (by law).

I feel it is unfair to offer legal benefits to pairs of consenting adults if they are male/female but not if they are the same gender. I think it is wrong to purposely exclude same sex couples from getting marriage benefits.

If someone believes that homosexuality is "sinful" (which I do not), then they should refrain from getting involved with anyone of their own gender. But I don't think that it is right (or constitutional) for people to be trying to outlaw something simply because of their religious beliefs, and with no valid ethical theory backing it.

 

[angellica]

They are not allowed to legally marry the consenting adult they love - but you will be able to, because you are straight.

When Christianity was illegal, in Rome while the Gospels were being written, everyone had the "same right" to worship any Roman gods (or those adopted into the Roman pantheon at different points) and the Caesar (by law).

I feel it is unfair to offer legal benefits to pairs of consenting adults if they are male/female but not if they are the same gender. I think it is wrong to purposely exclude same sex couples from getting marriage benefits.

If someone believes that homosexuality is "sinful" (which I do not), then they should refrain from getting involved with anyone of their own gender. But I don't think that it is right (or constitutional) for people to be trying to outlaw something simply because of their religious beliefs, and with no valid ethical theory backing it.

A man and woman marriage on its own can produce a family - a homosexual one cannot. This is the basis of the marriage concept. It would be very hard to weed out those marrying but not planning on children, so it is open to all man-woman relationships. Marriage is based on family more than on love, traditionally anyway.