It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Straight Razor
California may allow all the legal gay marriages it wants but the same couple can be legally arrested for anal sex in Georgia. Going against legal reciprocity and expanding benefits is a tough battle, and when you add the change is not for a wholesome cause -- homosexuality is not wholesome -- it does not stand much chance for success.
Originally posted by Lethil
Marriage has nothing to do with the church....thats like saying cheese and a bottle of vodka have something in common...the church would like you to think they have some moral authority on the matter,when in reality it dates back thousands of years before the *church* was even established...and when i say church i mean most modern monotheistic religions...thats if you buy the fact they were mono in the first place before being edited....anyway its all homophobic feelings wrapped up in religion imo...
But yah..i understand where you are coming from...we just shouldnt tolerate this on the bounds of religious freedom blah blah etc These people are just against human freeedom that doesnt conform to their views.Case Closed.
Originally posted by scorand
reply to post by TrailGator
you are more than welcome to believe what you will but the fact remains that the current bible was written by men who have on several occasions mistranslated, misconstrued, and flat out manipulated the book...to push their idea what is acceptable and rightous.. and this fact has been shown in many arenas from the slave trade oh throughout history..and the church has proven to be incredibly hostile about questioning its idealology, from galileo from claiming that the earth revolved around the sun and bruno claiming that there were other worlds outside our own..the bible has been used by egocentrical people for thousands of years to boost their superiority complexes.. you know, the sister bertha better than you syndrome
Originally posted by Critical
Gay people cant help being gay. They should be allowed to marry. On the contrary i think the world would be a better place if gay people were suddenly vaporised.
Originally posted by dragonfire2159
reply to post by 888LetsRoll
Why does the name matter? The connotations are subjective. By calling it a union or such, one does not tackle the inability of some to accept others for who they are.... While the actual act of reproduction is based on biology, the idea of "marriage" is a social construct, and therefore should deal with social situations, that being two individuals wanting to be united, regardless of sex...
Originally posted by Lethill
Marriage has nothing to do with the church....thats like saying cheese and a bottle of vodka have something in common...the church would like you to think they have some moral authority on the matter,when in reality it dates back thousands of years before the *church* was even established...and when i say church i mean most modern monotheistic religions...thats if you buy the fact they were mono in the first place before being edited....anyway its all homophobic feelings wrapped up in religion imo...
But yah..i understand where you are coming from...we just shouldnt tolerate this on the bounds of religious freedom blah blah etc These people are just against human freeedom that doesnt conform to their views.Case Closed.
Originally posted by TrailGator
Originally posted by dragonfire2159
reply to post by 888LetsRoll
"so, then, if the 'church' doesnt own any right to marriage, why even call it a "marriage"??? that word is sacred to many religions around the world. It carries a sign of a covenant, that Christians at least, believe is symbolic of man's relationship with God."
"........It thus attacks the very core of my - and countless Americans and others around the world - beliefs."
I think my reasoning for maintaining the label "marriage" regardless of religious undertones, is that gay marriage falls under both definitions, in my opinion. It is still a unification of two individuals who would like to combine their hearts, the more dictionary/originative definition that I subscribe to. I also agree that marriage is representative of the union between humanity and God. I see gay marriage as the exact same, as I feel that God loves all of us equally and the emotions between two inviduals who are in love is equal regardless of the sex of the two. I feel rather than juding the individuals based on the type of sex they have, God would look at the feelings the two have for each other and the commitment that they would like to make. Thus, from my perspective, God would merely judge their hearts and how they treat each other, not the societal acceptance of their union. Therefore, gay marriage is equal to heterosexual marriage in my mind.
Not to sound combatative, but I feel that beliefs are meant to be challenged. If a belief is based on any type of hierarchy, whether based on economics, race, religion, behavior, etc, I feel that it is a judgemental belief system, and I would prefer a belief system based on acceptance. But that's just my belief (haha), and is therefore subjective, so it is impossible to know what belief is "right". I just see acceptance as better than judgement, as it provides for an open forum in which to discuss all behaviors as equal, decreasing the chances of discriminating against a behavior because of the action as opposed to the result of that behavior.
I don't see a negative result to homosexuality, in regards to societal decay, corrupting children, crime, etc. I have yet to find any objective proof that homosexuality causes anything negative, other than bringing out the hate/judgement in individuals, which is the fault of those individuals not homosexuals. Because I see nothing wrong with homosexuality, I feel that it is not a separate entity from heterosexuality, and merely another expression of humanity.
In justifying my belief system I use the following example. Statistically there is bound to be homosexuals in every individual's family, regardless of geographical location, race, religion, nationality, etc. I question if I would feel justifiable in denying my family member the same rights as me, merely because of whom they find attractive. I also feel that God would not want me to judge my family as such, for I should show love instead of judgement. Because of this inevitability, I cannot agree with a belief system that judges homosexuality negatively, and would cause me to see a family member as a "lower" class than myself, because of a natural human behavior that happens to be different than my behavior. Just my two cents, not saying I'm right, just how I view it.