Eh. I was ranting about lousy scholarship and not gay marriage for a reason. ;) But since you asked other questions, I'll answer.
I can't say that despite my faith in the Bible, that I entirely have come to peace with or approve of slaughtering enemy tribes. To a point I understand: Look at the Palestine and Israel situation. But I don't think I could do it, even if I was ordered by God specifically.
Why are we formulating secular law, based on a book used only by a certain amount of the population ?
Despite my Christianity, that's something I'm not entirely sure I want. In theory, it could be awesome. In practice, we have Saudi Arabia. I don't really wish to become the Western version, as devoutly as I believe the Bible. As you noted, there's also that whole 'secular' concept. For me, it's been a complex issue. Whether it -should- be being argued/voted on, people do and it becomes a matter of voting or not for an amendent/law. At that point it's a personal choice and no longer fully or mostly a debate what about what -should- define the law.
My personal issue is that I have difficultly separing marriage from the religious connotations I have. Silly or not, I don't appear to be the only one. Based on recent comments and reasons I'll post in another post, I'm leaning toward hoping they either federalize civil unions or civil unionize marriage and therefore leave the couple free to pursue a religious ceremony if they wish one.
Why do we want the government to tell us who we can get married to ?
Because the government has done such a bang up job with everything else?
If someone does not believe in a specific religion, why would they be prevented from making decisions or even having basic visitation rights when their life long partner is maimed in a car accident ?
I've never agreed with that aspect. Nor the lack of health care, nor as a friend recently pointed out, that gay couples are denied things each other's social security and so on. We don't penalize straight couples or unmarried couples for Biblical sin that way, so..
Why do we extend government protection to equal rights to groups that want to take that right away from other citizens ?
So KKK members and some PETA members should no longer have equal rights or civil protections? I'm not sure how you defeat the 'enemy' by becoming them. If someone else is an asshole, my being an asshole doesn't usually change them or hasn't yet anyway.
If the declaration of independence say "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." why does religious groups try to reduce those unalienable rights ?
Probably for the same reason that our sainted founding fathers that wrote that denied them to over 3/4 of the population (anyone female, black or poor): because they believe they know better.
runequester: I was going to reply, but found I didn't have a lot to add. I don't feel I can necessarily vote for gay marriage, but I find it.. idiotic that we can argue that only the scary gay people should be penalized for not living according to the Bible re: benefits, social security, taxes and so on. I can't justify that and definitely believe that benefits need to be federalized. At the end of the day, making someone destitute or denying them healthcare isn't 'christian' either and definitely doesn't bring them to God.
"Why do we extend government protection to equal rights to groups that want to take that right away from other citizens ?
So KKK members and some PETA members should no longer have equal rights or civil protections? I'm not sure how you defeat the 'enemy' by becoming them. If someone else is an asshole, my being an asshole doesn't usually change them or hasn't yet anyway."
I'm not necessarily jumping into this debate because runequester made a lot of points I agree with, but I think the assumed answer to that question is that no group or person should be allowed to alienate the rights of another.
I seriously doubt anybody thinks that because there is no gay marriage, nobody should be allowed to be married - nobody's saying 'THEN TAKE AWAY ALL RIGHTS', they're trying to make you understand for just one second what it would be like to be the group with your rights threatened or nonexistant. what if you had no religious freedom? what if you couldn't get married because you like men, and God only advocated it for people of the same gender? That's just an attempt for the people protesting so hard to stop and think for two seconds what they're trying to put someone else through. It's often the opposite - because straight people can abuse the shit out of marriage (and many barely even understand the religious background TO marriage), why are gay people held under the microscope? It's like they're saying, AS LONG AS IT IS A PENIS AND VAGINA (neither of which were..earned by the carrier) THEN THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT AND HAVE ALL THESE BENEFITS BECAUSE CLEARLY GOD SEES THEM AS MORE DESERVING THAN TWO VAGINAS/TWO PENISES.
I mean, really? It sounds stupid to me. I don't follow the bible to the letter at all, but the idea that God, in all of his/her infinite wisdom finds two filthy, guiltless, sinning men and women more deserving of the sacrament of marriage than two honestly in love christian lesbian/gays is ridiculous.
Nevermind the social security etc for a second - what about the gay people that want marriage in the purely religious sense, so that they can be closer to God? That..isn't a good enough reason for people? They're just as religious as you are, they love and worship God just as much as you do, they confess and try to live as pure a life as possible, except, OMG, THEY FELL IN LOVE WITH SOMEONE OF THE SAME GENDER!!! Therefore they = burning in hell and condemned forever and how dare they shit on holy, perfect, renowned and respected marriage!
To sum it up, people that treated marriage like trash before sure care now that someone else is trying to do it.
The more I think about this, the more miniscule the gender issue seems at all.
I told you this on aim, but I will clarify here. I do get the example and what it was supposed to say. I am also used to a good many people (christian and non), that are thrilled to become the enemy. The evil atheists are presecuting you? Civil suits, letters of complaint, fight the power!!! Atheists: There's a trace of religion, we must beat it to death with clubs! ACLU: We will defend people, but selectively and you can desecrate unpopular religions with crosses dipped in urine as art, but Lord forbid you be homophobic or racist!! Those people -exist- and they are why, when I hear things like that, I go 'ieeeee'. Hate doesn't conquer hate.
heh. The Bible warns me to expect religious persecution. It would suck, but it is to be expected. Christians around the world are dying and being tortured for their faith. I'm profoundly lucky that I'm -not-. It's luck as much as anything.
I mentioned some of that in my next post. I do feel the Bible trumps all, I'll come out and just say it. I don't feel I can necessarily endorse some things (I'm not endorsing straight people have sex outside of marriage either) whether they're legal or not, but at the end of the day, I can't justify the bullshit either. So John McCain can have his three marriages, but a steady gay couple shouldn't have rights to each other's property? How does that work?
I don't think straight sinners are superior. I know I'm sure as hell not. I've also known too many straight assholes to think straight=win. The only explanation I can come to is people like to attack the sins they aren't doing. If you're a straight man, being gay isn't your problem and hey, you had -reasons- for those three divorces, right? At least you aren't gay!
what about the gay people that want marriage in the purely religious sense, so that they can be closer to God? That..isn't a good enough reason for people?
At the end of the day, I don't believe it works like that. Let's ignore the gay issue for the moment and take -me-. I don't believe I get to fall in love, have premarital sex and do whatever the hell I want and expect God to condone and bring me closer to Him because it feels good. I don't think I get to have a harem of hot guys because it would be -nice- and I think I love them (or maybe I do) and I get a 'get out of jail free card' because of that love. Might I be wrong? Sure, but I won't know until I die. All I can do until then is pray, try be a good person and follow God as best I know how.
Therefore they = burning in hell and condemned forever and how dare they shit on holy, perfect, renowned and respected marriage!
The Christians that go on that tangent forget that -one- sin is enough to separate someone from God according to their Bible. That that one divorce, one adultery or even one moment of hate is enough to prove they are sinners and that the only way they will come to God is by His grace, not their purity. Belief is what saves them, not anything they've done or hope to do. As for spitting on marriage, Anna Nicole Smith anyone?
I can't say that despite my faith in the Bible, that I entirely have come to peace with or approve of slaughtering enemy tribes. To a point I understand: Look at the Palestine and Israel situation. But I don't think I could do it, even if I was ordered by God specifically.
Why are we formulating secular law, based on a book used only by a certain amount of the population ?
Despite my Christianity, that's something I'm not entirely sure I want. In theory, it could be awesome. In practice, we have Saudi Arabia. I don't really wish to become the Western version, as devoutly as I believe the Bible. As you noted, there's also that whole 'secular' concept. For me, it's been a complex issue. Whether it -should- be being argued/voted on, people do and it becomes a matter of voting or not for an amendent/law. At that point it's a personal choice and no longer fully or mostly a debate what about what -should- define the law.
My personal issue is that I have difficultly separing marriage from the religious connotations I have. Silly or not, I don't appear to be the only one. Based on recent comments and reasons I'll post in another post, I'm leaning toward hoping they either federalize civil unions or civil unionize marriage and therefore leave the couple free to pursue a religious ceremony if they wish one.
Why do we want the government to tell us who we can get married to ?
Because the government has done such a bang up job with everything else?
If someone does not believe in a specific religion, why would they be prevented from making decisions or even having basic visitation rights when their life long partner is maimed in a car accident ?
I've never agreed with that aspect. Nor the lack of health care, nor as a friend recently pointed out, that gay couples are denied things each other's social security and so on. We don't penalize straight couples or unmarried couples for Biblical sin that way, so..
Why do we extend government protection to equal rights to groups that want to take that right away from other citizens ?
So KKK members and some PETA members should no longer have equal rights or civil protections? I'm not sure how you defeat the 'enemy' by becoming them. If someone else is an asshole, my being an asshole doesn't usually change them or hasn't yet anyway.
If the declaration of independence say "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." why does religious groups try to reduce those unalienable rights ?
Probably for the same reason that our sainted founding fathers that wrote that denied them to over 3/4 of the population (anyone female, black or poor): because they believe they know better.
Reply
Reply
Reply
So KKK members and some PETA members should no longer have equal rights or civil protections? I'm not sure how you defeat the 'enemy' by becoming them. If someone else is an asshole, my being an asshole doesn't usually change them or hasn't yet anyway."
I'm not necessarily jumping into this debate because runequester made a lot of points I agree with, but I think the assumed answer to that question is that no group or person should be allowed to alienate the rights of another.
Reply
Reply
Besides, I don't think denying things like healthcare or the right to visit dying loved ones brings them to God either.
Reply
I mean, really? It sounds stupid to me. I don't follow the bible to the letter at all, but the idea that God, in all of his/her infinite wisdom finds two filthy, guiltless, sinning men and women more deserving of the sacrament of marriage than two honestly in love christian lesbian/gays is ridiculous.
Nevermind the social security etc for a second - what about the gay people that want marriage in the purely religious sense, so that they can be closer to God? That..isn't a good enough reason for people? They're just as religious as you are, they love and worship God just as much as you do, they confess and try to live as pure a life as possible, except, OMG, THEY FELL IN LOVE WITH SOMEONE OF THE SAME GENDER!!! Therefore they = burning in hell and condemned forever and how dare they shit on holy, perfect, renowned and respected marriage!
To sum it up, people that treated marriage like trash before sure care now that someone else is trying to do it.
The more I think about this, the more miniscule the gender issue seems at all.
Reply
heh. The Bible warns me to expect religious persecution. It would suck, but it is to be expected. Christians around the world are dying and being tortured for their faith. I'm profoundly lucky that I'm -not-. It's luck as much as anything.
I mentioned some of that in my next post. I do feel the Bible trumps all, I'll come out and just say it. I don't feel I can necessarily endorse some things (I'm not endorsing straight people have sex outside of marriage either) whether they're legal or not, but at the end of the day, I can't justify the bullshit either. So John McCain can have his three marriages, but a steady gay couple shouldn't have rights to each other's property? How does that work?
I don't think straight sinners are superior. I know I'm sure as hell not. I've also known too many straight assholes to think straight=win. The only explanation I can come to is people like to attack the sins they aren't doing. If you're a straight man, being gay isn't your problem and hey, you had -reasons- for those three divorces, right? At least you aren't gay!
what about the gay people that want marriage in the purely religious sense, so that they can be closer to God? That..isn't a good enough reason for people?
At the end of the day, I don't believe it works like that. Let's ignore the gay issue for the moment and take -me-. I don't believe I get to fall in love, have premarital sex and do whatever the hell I want and expect God to condone and bring me closer to Him because it feels good. I don't think I get to have a harem of hot guys because it would be -nice- and I think I love them (or maybe I do) and I get a 'get out of jail free card' because of that love. Might I be wrong? Sure, but I won't know until I die. All I can do until then is pray, try be a good person and follow God as best I know how.
Therefore they = burning in hell and condemned forever and how dare they shit on holy, perfect, renowned and respected marriage!
The Christians that go on that tangent forget that -one- sin is enough to separate someone from God according to their Bible. That that one divorce, one adultery or even one moment of hate is enough to prove they are sinners and that the only way they will come to God is by His grace, not their purity. Belief is what saves them, not anything they've done or hope to do. As for spitting on marriage, Anna Nicole Smith anyone?
Reply
Leave a comment