Simple question re: homosexuality

Originally posted by Helious
What "right" would that be exactly? Please enlighten me how that statement comes from the brain and not from the stomach.

The same civil rights everyone else has. What has the stomach got to do with it?

Have you been following the thread?

You should have no right to discriminate based on your religion, however much you think you do. If gays were discriminating against "Christians" we'd never hear the last of it.

The world is full of idiots who think only they matter, and will use any lame excuse to justify it.

Originally posted by markosity1973

Just remember though, you don't know our back stories in the gay community. While a lot of straight people might find my own life story remarkable and tragic, in the gay community it becomes rather ordinary. We may put up a brave and sometimes offensive face, but underneath it all a lot of us have had very difficult lives.

edit on 30-5-2013 by markosity1973 because: (no reason given)

Thanks for your forgiveness. I extend mine, as well--to one and all for the hate etc. tossed my direction.

I'm familiar with the underneath horror stories of plenty of homosexual folks as well as straight folks. ATTACHMENT DISORDER is a b*t*h for everyone to cope with, hopefully mostly recover from, overcome. The consequences are traumatic and super destructive for the rest of the person's life. They are, I am, we are, brain damaged in the areas of emotional expression and the brain area that manages relationships; judgments in relationships; communications; feelings etc. in relationships.

I have a ton of compassion for all such.

I just have not observed some choices making things lastingly and wholesale better in this life in some key areas and respects, much less in eternity.

Certainly loving relationships and parents are better than none and much better than the opposite.

Originally posted by BO XIAN
Thanks for your forgiveness. I extend mine, as well--to one and all for the hate etc. tossed my direction.

Oh the irony.

Judge others and you yourself will be judged.

Hilarious how you now try to play the victim.

Originally posted by BO XIAN

I'm familiar with the underneath horror stories of plenty of homosexual folks as well as straight folks. ATTACHMENT DISORDER is a b*t*h for everyone to cope with, hopefully mostly recover from, overcome.

And you were doing so well until you got to that line

I know what you mean by attachment disorder. I met my partner in my 30's but before that I made many bad relationship choices, because I did not want to be alone.

However, you must understand that it really is possible for 2 people of the same gender to love one another.

Here, your treasured bible even speaks of it. Any gay person who reads these quotes will instantly relate to these quotes;

1 Samuel 18:1 After David had finished talking with Saul, Jonathan became one in spirit with David, and he loved him as himself.

David's Song for Saul and Jonathan
25How are the mighty fallen in the middle of the battle! O Jonathan, you were slain in your high places. 26I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant have you been to me: your love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women. 27How are the mighty fallen, and the weapons of war perished!

This space for rent...

reply to post by markosity1973


Thanks for your kind reply.

I understand your perspective.

Mine is far from identical.

Some things, I can agree with you on.

I agree that same gendered folks CAN love one another selflessly.

I don't know what percentage of couples heterosexual or homosexual exhibit more selfless true loving motivations vs selfish motivations.


I don't believe David and Jonathan's relationship was homosexual.

I certainly believe with Henry Wright that

ALL ADDICTIONS

are a desperate searching for quality, genuine, robust, intense, bonded father's love, understanding, healthy affection . . . that wasn't there insufficient qualities and quantities the first 6-8 years of life.

.

Originally posted by BO XIAN
reply to post by markosity1973

 

ALL ADDICTIONS

are a desperate searching for quality, genuine, robust, intense, bonded father's love, understanding, healthy affection . . . that wasn't there insufficient qualities and quantities the first 6-8 years of life.

.

edit on 30/5/2013 by BO XIAN because: addition

I'm just going to address that last part of your post.

I will only speak for myself on this one, but my father did not reject me nor ignore me as a child. I am the oldest of 5 kids, so it is definitely not cut and dried like this pseudo scientist claims it to be. Dad paid attention to all of us different in amounts at different times, like any parent in a multi child family does.

I do not feel that my dad ever short changed me in attention or love and if he did, well he did it to all of us. If attention deficit / love deprivation from my father were the reason, then by pure reasoning my other brothers would be gay too, all three of them. But they are not. Rather, they are all married to women or engaged to be.

reply to post by XxNightAngelusxX

I made my point a million times. I'm sorry that, because you don't agree with it, it has to be wrong and "bigoted."

Its not that I dont agree with it that makes it bigoted.

So I should have ignored you? Then I would have gotten the "She ran away cause she knew she was wrong!" behind-the-back talk. I know how people like you work.

This aint the schoolyard. Aside from that, if we want to talk about ya, we'll do it in private messages

I think its stupid that homelessness and starvation are less important to some people than gay politics.

God help me.

Unfortunately, as Ive already said, it isnt just politics. As much as you try to ignore it, there is far more at play here.

Baseless name-calling.

To claim that these are not life or death issues to some is, indeed, clueless. Nothing baseless about it, and it was a description of your knowledge of the situation, not 'name-calling'.

Awww, I'm da big scary bigot, aren't I?

Scary? Not so much. As for bigot, well, Ive said my piece, Ill let everyone else judge for themselves.

Here's what we've established; You don't like my opinions.

Never once said I didnt like them. I said it is foolish to tell others what should be more important.

Do you see the difference?

And I don't care that you don't like my opinions.

And yet, here you are defending them, all the way to backing away from them...

School doesn't teach people how to think and learn. Establishment brainwash, that's all it is.
And besides the fact that I HATE school work, I'm busting my ass to graduate right now. Not just sitting around gathering dust, forcing my big bad opinions on defenseless gay rights advocates.

Stay in school.

So you weren't here telling people what should be more important to them? Oops, theres that hypocrisy again.

At this point, I simply dont have the energy to continue with this silliness. Consider yourself released from whatever bonds you feel are keeping you here. I will not reply to you again.....im getting dizzy from all of this round and round.

reply to post by markosity1973


Each genetic endowment responds to whatever level of ATTACHMENT DISORDER

DIFFERENTLY.

Some are greatly more vulnerable genetically, than others.

I believe that issue plays a part in the homosexual orientation. It plays a part also in a lot of other stuff the folks struggle with managing well.

I don't know that marriage or non-marriage will help a great number of folks either way. I can argue both sides of that to some degree.

to mimic an early post, indeed my life has been what most some if any consider tragic, and I'm still young(Early twenties), i have much more to deal with, i wont get into sob stories here because many have likewise, gay and straight,

we are not asking for 'Special Rights' or more than Straight, just equal, we are not asking to be considered 'Superior' or 'Special' just to be treated as every other Human is, if your religion teaches you to discriminate against a certain person because of belief or sexuality or gender or whatever, you have the right to believe it, just not the right to take away me being a 'Human'

Originally posted by BO XIAN
reply to post by markosity1973

 

Each genetic endowment responds to whatever level of ATTACHMENT DISORDER

DIFFERENTLY.

Some are greatly more vulnerable genetically, than others.

I believe that issue plays a part in the homosexual orientation. It plays a part also in a lot of other stuff the folks struggle with managing well.

I don't know that marriage or non-marriage will help a great number of folks either way. I can argue both sides of that to some degree.

/
Well despite the fact that you are of the obstinate belief that we are faulty in some way, you have made amazing progress toward acceptance since the beginning of this debate.

Kudos to you for that

Genetic or not, environmental or not, we are who we are. I am not looking for a cure, why should I? God allowed me to be this way.

I wasn't going to enter into the religious side of my own story too much, but since I know you are of religious belief, I'll share with you so that you understand where I come from.

Firstly, when I came out -my mother 'detained me and interrogated me until I admitted I was gay. She then proceeded to cry and told me that the devil had taken hold of me and that we needed to pray to God for him to heal me.

All that did was make me want to kill myself because I had just been labelled as faulty and a mistake by my own parent. So I did try and kill myself. I was successful, I had a massive heart attack caused by an overdose. But the nurses did not want me to die so they saved me. *Ask me about my near death experience one day*

I was put into a psychiatric ward, all sorts of dramas occurred, blaming, praying, pointing of fingers, the works. Then my very Methodist great Aunt suggested we go to Exodus ministries, as they could 'cure' gay people. The ministry sent out a representative to talk to me. The hospital tried to ban them, but at my insistence I was allowed to meet with this representative.

He spent an hour drilling me and telling me that being gay is WRONG in the eyes of God and demanded to know my every sexual fantasy. As this point I was like f*$# you, you pervert, I aint telling you nothing. In the end he threw his arms up in horror and told me that I could not be gay because I was still a virgin. Real intelligent man he was that made me feel good about myself (not)

So, eventually I was released from hospital after I promised not to harm myself again. Our local priest found me a job with a 'good' catholic family on their farm. So I spent the next two years immersed in more prayer and more people trying to 'fix' me.

Then came the Medjugorje thing. My parents had heard about it and wanted me to go, so I did. I am not going to go into detail, but some good came out of that experience and I ended up going to Europe, still in the hopes of being 'cured' from my gay.

Guess what, I gave God ample chance to fix me, but he chose not to. This is in spite of the fact I had been prayed over, (often with people speaking in tongues) So go figure.

In the end I met my first boyfriend and well that was a disaster because my family were horrified that I was giving into my 'demon' This is in spite of the fact I had been prayed over, (often with people speaking in tongues)

There were several years of name calling, praying against me and my boyfriend of the day. In the end I just got sick of it and moved to another country.

So, do I worry about the Christian implications. No, I am not worried about going to hell, because I have already been there.

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by Helious
What "right" would that be exactly? Please enlighten me how that statement comes from the brain and not from the stomach.

The same civil rights everyone else has. What has the stomach got to do with it?

Everyone doesn't have the same civil rights though.

Perhaps the most remarkable thing about gay marriage, is that society approved it before it approved the world's oldest profession.

Prostitutes still have to duck the law. The right to sell your "best asset," to get the cash to put food on the table, is still denied women. Yet, if you have a great voice, you can become a singer, and sell your voice to the highest bidder. If you're a talented actor, you can work in the movies, and become a millionaire. If you're a great writer, you can become richer than the queen, like the Harry Potter author, etc..but if all you have is a great body, they put you in jail if you try to sell or rent it out for a night. And yet, they allow gay marriage.

How could they deny the civil rights of the working girls, and grant equal rights to the homosexuals? It makes no sense. No sense, at all, I tell you. The world is upside down.

reply to post by Darth_Prime

Dear Darth_Prime,

We've talked before and you seem a reasonable person, let me ask: Is there any way to resolve this through discussion, or can it only be resolved through lobbying and the courts? Which is a nice way of saying "forcing" a resolution on one group or the other.

No need to re-consider all the arguments, suffice it to say that there are reasonable, non-religious arguments to be made against gay marriage, and powerfully emotional ones to be made for it. The two just don't seem to be talking to each other and compromise (civil unions) has been rejected.

Is there any sense talking about it any more? I'm genuinely curious, there may be a reason to continue talking, but I don't see it right now. I'm willing to be instructed.

With respect,
Charles1952

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Darth_Prime

 

Dear Darth_Prime,

We've talked before and you seem a reasonable person, let me ask: Is there any way to resolve this through discussion, or can it only be resolved through lobbying and the courts? Which is a nice way of saying "forcing" a resolution on one group or the other.

No need to re-consider all the arguments, suffice it to say that there are reasonable, non-religious arguments to be made against gay marriage, and powerfully emotional ones to be made for it. The two just don't seem to be talking to each other and compromise (civil unions) has been rejected.

Is there any sense talking about it any more? I'm genuinely curious, there may be a reason to continue talking, but I don't see it right now. I'm willing to be instructed.

With respect,
Charles1952

discussion is healthy, i love discussion and welcome it, the only way to resolve this is to understand the separation of church and state completely, we should be afforded the right to marry just as you, if the church doesn't want to marry a couple they have the right not to as a 'Religious institution' but that does not and should never infringe on the 'Rights' and or "Privileges'

reply to post by Darth_Prime

Dear Darth_Prime,

Ok, you've talked me into it, you silver tongued devil, you. Let's give it a try.

the only way to resolve this is to understand the separation of church and state completely,

You mention that churches should be allowed to have wedding ceremonies for whomever they choose. I understand that, and it would be extremely difficult to change it. Do you mean that religious beliefs should never be considered in government and legislation, or does your "separation of church and state" mean something else?

we should be afforded the right to marry just as you, if the church doesn't want to marry a couple they have the right not to as a 'Religious institution' but that does not and should never infringe on the 'Rights' and or "Privileges'

I'm taking this to mean that gays should have the right to marry. (I'm not sure what you mean when you mention rights and priveleges. Is there an important difference for you?)

I'm reluctant to say more until I know we're starting from the same place.

With respect,
Charles1952

Indeed, the 'Laws' of the United States should not be based on religion nor be conceived under religious beliefs, therefor the decisions should not be based on any Dogma, so if a religion is against Gay marriage it should not be a factor as a 'Law'

as far as the religious institution goes, indeed it has the freedom to practice it's religion as fit, that is never to say it is above 'Laws' or the 'Country' but that it has the freedom to practice freely,

if a religion is against gay marriage they would have that right to not marry a couple, whilst it is discrimination against a person based on 'sexuality' under their religious institution they would have that freedom,

but that does not mean that same sex would be refused not only the rights that straight people do as a married couple, but likewise the privileges

i say 'Rights' and 'Privileges' because many say marriage is a privilege and is not a factor in equal rights

Originally posted by SQUEALER
Everyone doesn't have the same civil rights though.

Really? I thought all people were treated the same, how naive was I?

Isn't that kind of the point here?

Are you sure you didn't mean everyone shouldn't have the same civil rights?

Perhaps the most remarkable thing about gay marriage, is that society approved it before it approved the world's oldest profession.

How are the two things even remotely connected?

Are you obsessing over sex or something? Must be a hang-up the the "christian" crowd, because you all seem to focus on it a lot it seems. There I go stating the obvious again.

Prostitutes still have to duck the law. The right to sell your "best asset," to get the cash to put food on the table, is still denied women. Yet, if you have a great voice, you can become a singer, and sell your voice to the highest bidder. If you're a talented actor, you can work in the movies, and become a millionaire. If you're a great writer, you can become richer than the queen, like the Harry Potter author, etc..but if all you have is a great body, they put you in jail if you try to sell or rent it out for a night. And yet, they allow gay marriage.

So because prostitution is still illegal then gay marriage should be also? It's actually legal in far more places than you probably realise.

Again, the one has nothing to do with the other.

How could they deny the civil rights of the working girls, and grant equal rights to the homosexuals? It makes no sense. No sense, at all, I tell you. The world is upside down.

You're making a pretty silly argument here because I don't think you yourself would really support legal prostitution. You're making a complete strawman, because this discussion is not about prostitution. If you want to make a thread about the rights of women to be prostitutes, then I would support you in that cause, but I doubt you would. Surprise me.

Prostitution by country

So what was that about my stomach?

reply to post by Darth_Prime

Dear Darth_Prime,

Thanks, very good. I think I'm with you.

There is no doubt that religious groups aren't excited about gay marriage. In the past, their teachings were accepted by enough of the population to vote for and enact anti-gay marriage laws. They were probably helped by the nearly universal belief, at the time, that that was how it was supposed to be done, it was part of the culture.

At the time of the founding, and for many years after, nearly all politicians called for prayer to God in various situations, and the heroes of the day were nearly uniformly religious. I think it's safe to say that a long time ago, we considered ourselves to be a Godly, if not Christian, nation.

As you know, as late as the 1950's, we put "Under God" in the Pledge, and some time around there (I just don't remember when) we put "In God we Trust" on our paper currency. Throughout our history though, we never pushed one denomination or their beliefs out as law.

Is it also safe to say that the idea of religion having no impact at all on government is a fairly recent one, as is the idea of gay marriage?

I completely agree with you that no particular denomination's belief should be made law. But as with the Pledge and the currency, (and Chaplains for Congress and the military) I'm willing to accept the country working under the general idea that there is a God.

but that does not mean that same sex would be refused not only the rights that straight people do as a married couple, but likewise the privileges

And here's where people start yelling at each other.

One question which I'm having trouble finding an answer to, is "Why?" Why should the definition of marriage be changed from it's history in this country to something else? Why should financial benefits be extended to gay couples? I don't mean that argumentatively, no fight picking for me, but to make a change in anything I would think the benefits should out weigh the costs.

I can understand that gays who wanted to get married would benefit psychologically and financially, but that is a very tiny percentage of the population. Do benefits to society outweigh the costs? Do you even think that's a question which should be addressed?

With respect,
Charles1952

because many still look at it and perceive it as 'Gay' or 'Straight' and not human, we should receive equal rights and privileges because we are Human as you are Human, our sexuality should never factor into 'Rights'

if not, why do we have to pay taxes? why do we have to do things that 'Americans' or other countries do if we are not considered equal? they will gladly take from us but we get nothing in return?

Equality as human to Human,

Originally posted by charles1952
Why should the definition of marriage be changed from it's history in this country to something else? Why should financial benefits be extended to gay couples? I don't mean that argumentatively, no fight picking for me, but to make a change in anything I would think the benefits should out weigh the costs.

Why would the definition of marriage have to change?

marriage
mar·riage
[mar-ij]
noun
1. a. the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. Antonyms: separation.
b. a similar institution involving partners of the same gender: gay marriage. Antonyms: separation.

2. the state, condition, or relationship of being married; wedlock: a happy marriage. Synonyms: matrimony. Antonyms: single life, bachelorhood, spinsterhood, singleness; separation.

3. the legal or religious ceremony that formalizes the decision of two people to live as a married couple, including the accompanying social festivities: to officiate at a marriage. Synonyms: nuptials, marriage ceremony, wedding. Antonyms: divorce, annulment.

4. a relationship in which two people have pledged themselves to each other in the manner of a husband and wife, without legal sanction: trial marriage.

5. any close or intimate association or union: the marriage of words and music in a hit song. Synonyms: blend, merger, unity, oneness; alliance, confederation. Antonyms: separation, division, disunion, schism.

Why don't you explain why one section of society should be denied the same rights as another? Other than your religious objections. What LEGAL reason is there for denying rights to anybody? And if they are being denied why are you, as a CHRISTIAN, not fighting for their rights? What does the Bible teach, to hate what makes you uncomfortable or to love your neighbour AS YOURSELF? And that would be regardless of race, class, religion, or sexual orientation (it's not a sexual choice).

Look up Matthew 22:39. I believe 'love they neighbor' is in the Bible around 8 times? I'm sure it doesn't say 'love thy neighbour, unless they're gay'.

It's a good job for you we don't count sins instead of stars eh?