Gay Marriage. I am honestly confused

page: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by AnarchysAngel
reply to post by quietlearner
 


Opposing gay marriage will not prohibit anything that you mentioned from happening anyways. In fact, it has probably made it worse due to media attention.


That is what media should be harvesting after long time trying to bring this into people's life.

So , why now ? Why not 70's ?

That is because they were fearing the serious reaction of people to the whole matter.

That is why they decided to breed people. Year by year and movie by movie , there were curtains behind curtains that fell and. now , it is what is remaining of shame.

And now that there is no shame , they are brave enough to show their true face.




posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc
I have some advice for people of your way of thinking - Step into the light, its okay, modern thinking isnt going to hurt you.


I agree with everything else you've said, but this.


I would prefer them to stay in their little hell-hole of a cave and leave the rest of us sane people to live happily without having to educate and reason with people like this.

I enjoy a challenge, but so many of these people are so far in the closet themselves they have a passport for Narnia.
And the rest are just so damaged I think if we actually had to try to reason with them it would take a lot more than a few hours and a few cups of tea. I don't know if I'd have the energy for that.

Best leave them to their fire and brimstone.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:34 AM
link   
The concept of marriage predates organized religion by thousands of years. Religious organizations came along and "hijacked" marriage, and claimed it as their own institution.

Interesting fact: did you know that originally, marriage had very little to do with love? People, or families rather, arranged marriages for reasons having to do with politics, money, and power.


The oldest written reference to the institution of marriage comes from Hammurabi's Code of Ancient Mesopotamia (broadly covering modern day Iraq), and where the first permanent cities were established. This takes us back to around 1800 B.C., almost 4,000 years ago, however the custom of marriage certainly pre-dates even this.



More importantly, the Ancient Greeks also set the very clear pattern of marrying for position, wealth and power. The idea you married because you loved someone was irrelevant - sentimentality or feelings did not come into what was a commercial transaction between families looking to advance or protect their own positions. Upon becoming a wife, a Greek woman lost practicality all of her rights which has taken over 2,000 years to reverse (and is still continuing in most parts of the world today).


ezinearticles.com...?&id=3961171

So, you see, marriage has evolved over the eons to be something completely different, and continues to evolve.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


No one god has jurisdiction over marriage. Marriage transcends religious and cultural boundaries and exists in most cultures and societies. To think that marriage was handed down by a single God is just plain stupid, period (not saying you actually think this). Muslims get married, Jews get married, Buddhists get married, Hindus get married, Christians get married. So which one of their gods is in charge of marriage?

What about the ancient Greeks? In their culture the god of marriage was Hymen: en.wikipedia.org...(god)

So which God is it? Which of these traditional versions of marriage should we adhere to?



just about to mention this part. u bet me to it. this OBVIOUS counter/rebuttal had been lacking in this thread. thanks Titen-Sxull.

edit: same goes for your rebuttal kaylaluv. well said.
edit on 26-7-2012 by krossfyter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Titen-Sxull
 


That is why I said, marriage itself, if there is separation of church and state, should then not be recognised by the state. And for people of any religion, should be allowed the religious freedom to follow their own religion, should those laws not conflict with the laws of the state.
edit on 26-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 



Originally posted by OpinionatedB
But marriage has never been a state contract, it has always been a religious contract that the state recognises for legal purposes under freedom of religion because it is also a contractual agreement.


You are completely twisted around on that.
Marriage is ALWAYS a state contract. Religion is an added component. The state grants the license. Just like a driver's license. Is driving a religious contract?

When you get married, you sign a contract. Whether you do it in a church or courthouse, it's a STATE contract. There are witnesses that also sign the contract. It is a LEGAL contract.



If two people do not believe in God, why marry? Why not just draw up a legal contract recognisable by the state which defines the terms?


Marriage provides over a thousand benefits from the state AND the federal governments. There is no way to make a contract with the state and the federal government that provides all the benefits of marriage, except marriage.

Marriage Rights and Benefits



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 





Because everyone else already has equal treatment under marriage law. Gay people are the only group of consenting adults that are disallowed to marry.


But I repeat, marriage is not a public institution, never has been. Was God who defined it, and people who became secular. If you are going to become secular, ie: not believe in God, why simply try to redefine a religious institution simply because you like the institution but not the religion or the God who created it?

Why not say the institution itself is not then something you believe in, since there is no other part of the institution that you do?

In doing so, you are attempting to make religion itself irreligious.
edit on 26-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)


Are you saying that you think gay people are trying to change your religion? I am not gay or even hip to what the gay activist agenda is but I honestly don't think they are trying to invade your church and change it into a gay bar. I think they just want to be treated like everyone else. I could be wrong though



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by quietlearner

this us vs them mentality is not the way, especially when pro gays are asking for acceptance and understanding
most gay activist have to learn acceptance and understanding themselves first


You're asking homos to stop their hypocrisy, which is a pointless task.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by quietlearner
 


When they come to realize that personal opinion should take a back seat to preserving the American dream, this will be a much better country.

I don't care if you are for or against gay people. That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. When you can't tell me a reason other than a personal opinion with no constitutional basis, I call it what it is. Oppression, the very thing the constitution was written to protect us from.

I already outlined a way to deal with the problem, and make both sides happy while preserving the American dream. They don't want my idea though. It's too much like right.

When you violate the liberty of any human in America, Thomas Jefferson sheads another tear for them.
edit on 26-7-2012 by AnarchysAngel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


No actually, the only reason marriage was a state contract in history was because marriage was a religious aspect which was followed by the state.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by billy197300

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 





Because everyone else already has equal treatment under marriage law. Gay people are the only group of consenting adults that are disallowed to marry.


But I repeat, marriage is not a public institution, never has been. Was God who defined it, and people who became secular. If you are going to become secular, ie: not believe in God, why simply try to redefine a religious institution simply because you like the institution but not the religion or the God who created it?

Why not say the institution itself is not then something you believe in, since there is no other part of the institution that you do?

In doing so, you are attempting to make religion itself irreligious.
edit on 26-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)


Are you saying that you think gay people are trying to change your religion? I am not gay or even hip to what the gay activist agenda is but I honestly don't think they are trying to invade your church and change it into a gay bar. I think they just want to be treated like everyone else. I could be wrong though


Incidentally, I would support such a move. We really should make use of all those wonderful buildings rather than just let them sit there empty all the time as people wake up and leave the church


One day, when I'm wealthy enough, I will buy a church, a nice old one, and open a gay club. Yeah, I'm spiteful like that!



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by AnarchysAngel
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


The real answer to the problem is to remove religion from state. What I mean by that is, make all marriages a union in the eyes of the government, and let the private churches and religions sort the rest out. All unions would provide the same rights regardless of gender.

This isn't something that government should stick it's nose into. The fact that some churches have been willing to marry same gender couples, shows that the idea of what constitutes a marriage needs to be sorted out by the people.


To me the answer is just the opposite, make all marriages something not recognised by the state, since it is a religious institution, and guarentee all peoples equal rights and equal treatment under the law



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tramadolnights

Originally posted by quietlearner

this us vs them mentality is not the way, especially when pro gays are asking for acceptance and understanding
most gay activist have to learn acceptance and understanding themselves first


You're asking homos to stop their hypocrisy, which is a pointless task.



are you acting out of hate?



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tramadolnights

Originally posted by quietlearner

this us vs them mentality is not the way, especially when pro gays are asking for acceptance and understanding
most gay activist have to learn acceptance and understanding themselves first


You're asking Christians to stop their hypocrisy, which is a pointless task.


Fixed.

edit on 26-7-2012 by detachedindividual because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by OpinionatedB


To me the answer is just the opposite, make all marriages something not recognised by the state, since it is a religious institution, and guarentee all peoples equal rights and equal treatment under the law



but its not JUST a religious institution. christianity nor any organized religion own the concept of marriage.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:43 AM
link   
Is marriage in any aspect meaning sexual relation ship ?

Marriage is more than this , it involves kids , breeding children and inheriting.

IMO , OP should change the tittle to gay relationship.

Or change the definition in every single mind.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:44 AM
link   
edit on 29-7-2012 by alien because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by krossfyter
 


Religions are the ones who defined marriage to begin with.


this is the one reason I would fight same sex marriage, to change marriage into a irreligious thing, is trying to redefine a religious institution.

I would not fight equal rights under the law, quite the opposite actually, but I would fight changing an institution that is religious and defined by religion.



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tramadolnights
I have some advice for you. Get help for your homosexuality then rejoin society as a normal human.



My being Bisexual has not removed me from society, in fact i am very much apart of it.
edit on 26-7-2012 by SearchLightsInc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2012 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by mideast
Is marriage in any aspect meaning sexual relation ship ?

Marriage is more than this , it involves kids , breeding children and inheriting.

IMO , OP should change the tittle to gay relationship.

Or change the definition in every single mind.


I have always thought that marriage was about two people loving each other and showing commitment to one another. There are many many many people that either can't have kids or choose not to that are married.





top topics
 
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join