» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society

Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.

If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.

Google
  Web inthe00s.com



Subject: Gay rights

Written By: John_Harvey on 08/09/03 at 09:23 p.m.

Gays are becoming more and more accepted by our society. I see this as a positive sign that more states will allow civil unions of gay partners.

How does everyone feel about current events and homosexuals?

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/10/03 at 04:56 a.m.


Quoting:

How does everyone feel about current events and homosexuals?
End Quote



How much time do ya have... ;)

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Goreripper on 08/10/03 at 07:07 a.m.

Gays are human beings. Therefore they should have exactly the same rights as any other human being. Exactly. The Same.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/10/03 at 12:46 a.m.

Recently over here, we've had news pieces on gay couples getting the same rights as married couples.  I don't agree with this.  Either they give non-married live-in straight couples the same rights (thus rendering non-religious marriages pointless) or they introduce gay marriages like they've done in places like Deutschland, i believe.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Bobby on 08/10/03 at 04:02 p.m.

I hear the Anglican Church are going crackers over the gay bishop that has been appointed. This is definitely a worldwide theological problem because, whether this is a politically correct world or not, the bible is clearly against homosexuality.

I really believe that this could leave damaging consequences to the Church.

My thoughts on homosexuality are one's of indifference. I am an heterosexual but believe that sexuality is an individuals choice.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Taoist on 08/10/03 at 04:10 p.m.

Quoting:
Gays are human beings. Therefore they should have exactly the same rights as any other human being. Exactly. The Same.
End Quote


Yeah, what he said!  ;D

The point Hoeveel mentioned demonstrates a danger when considering rights.  I'm all for letting gay couples register their pertnerships and gain the same 'human' rights as anyone.  The problem is, if the legislation is too specific, it means that heterosexual couples have less rights.   All rights legislation should be thought out to apply to everyone and should set out rights that human being can expect without mentioning gays, black, women, etc.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/10/03 at 04:29 p.m.


Quoting:
I hear the Anglican Church are going crackers over the gay bishop that has been appointed. This is definitely a worldwide theological problem because, whether this is a politically correct world or not, the bible is clearly against homosexuality.

I really believe that this could leave damaging consequences to the Church.

My thoughts on homosexuality are one's of indifference. I am an heterosexual but believe that sexuality is an individuals choice.
End Quote



Are they against gays totally or do they accept that people have 'gay feelings' and are understandable and don't act on them and commit sodomy?  And is the gay bishop 'active' in that sense?

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Bobby on 08/10/03 at 04:39 p.m.

Quoting:
Are they against gays totally or do they accept that people have 'gay feelings' and are understandable and don't act on them and commit sodomy?  And is the gay bishop 'active' in that sense?
End Quote



I don't think the homosexuality issue with the church would have been too much of a problem if the person in question was not a bishop. I'm not sure whether he is 'active'.

I saw a reverend from Australia on the television and he said that homosexuality is clearly against the bible. I guess they are against the 'sin' itself not the people that commit it.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Harvey on 08/10/03 at 05:04 p.m.

Quoting:
This is definitely a worldwide theological problem because, whether this is a politically correct world or not, the bible is clearly against homosexuality.
End Quote


Did you know the Bible "clearly" states that you can't wear a cloak of two or more colors? It's in the same passage as the homosexuality = abomination thingy.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Taoist on 08/10/03 at 05:14 p.m.

w.r.t. The Bible and Religions.

I think you have to separate rights in society and rights w.r.t. other private individuals.
Rights in society should be for all, for example noone should be prevented from entering a public building or claiming a benefit on grounds of religion, gender, sexuality, etc.
But, Religion is a private club.  I think they have the right to set their own rules for joining.  Assuming separation of church and state, I can choose to join a religion or not without any prejudice to myself.  I don't have the right to demand the church changes it's rules to allow me in any more than I can demand that my neighbour changes his opinions to allow me to join his party.
When a religion is state sponsored, I could demand my right to access to those tax dollars.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hairspray on 08/10/03 at 05:30 p.m.

Quoting:All rights legislation should be thought out to apply to everyone and should set out rights that human being can expect without mentioning gays, black, women, etc.End Quote



Right. Why cause more problems by making special legislation for a particular group of people; legislation which will inevitably keep this group of people segregated in the eyes of society?

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Bobby on 08/10/03 at 05:32 p.m.

Quoting:
Did you know the Bible "clearly" states that you can't wear a cloak of two or more colors? It's in the same passage as the homosexuality = abomination thingy.
End Quote



No I did not know about cloaks in the bible, John Harvey.

I think you are trying to make the point that some things in the bible are not relevant and what you said in that instance is correct. I'm not saying that homosexuality is right or wrong (I stated my opinion in my first post). I am second-guessing the Anglican Church's perspective on homosexuality.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Taoist on 08/10/03 at 05:34 p.m.

Quoting:
Right. Why cause more problems by making special legislation for a particular group of people; legislation which will inevitably keep this group of people segregated?
End Quote


Exactly, and hence the problems with the current (proposed?) British legislation.  It will segregate heterosexual couples who aren't married but can't get the rights under homosexually specific laws.  I'm sure this will be rectified later under even more legislation but it would help to get it right first time.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Bobby on 08/10/03 at 05:35 p.m.

Quoting:
But, Religion is a private club.  I think they have the right to set their own rules for joining.End Quote



LOL. I hadn't thought of religion in that way before. I can just imagine God's Guardians standing by the door exclaiming 'If you're not wearing a tie, you're not coming in'.  ;D

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Goreripper on 08/10/03 at 06:33 p.m.

Leviticus has a lot to answer for.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/10/03 at 07:22 p.m.


Quoting:

Did you know the Bible "clearly" states that you can't wear a cloak of two or more colors? It's in the same passage as the homosexuality = abomination thingy.
End Quote



Hi John, I would like to know where this reference is if you can tell me. I looked in Chap. 20 of Leviticus (where homosexual acts are condemned) and found nothing of the cloak thing.

Quoting:

Leviticus has a lot to answer for.

End Quote



Hi Gore. What you must understand is that "Leviticus" (translation: "matters of the Levites")  was written at a very specific time to a very specific people. God was separating  the nation of Israel away from the rest of the world and instructing them on how to worship Him. Levitical law was meant for Israel alone.

Now, the coming of Christ has done away with the Levitical preisthood. Christ "fulfilled" the law of Leviticus thus doing away with it.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/10/03 at 07:23 p.m.

So technically modern Christians should completely disregard Leviticus?

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Bobby on 08/10/03 at 07:31 p.m.

Quoting:
So technically modern Christians should completely disregard Leviticus?
End Quote



I don't know.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Rice_Cube on 08/10/03 at 07:36 p.m.


Quoting:
So technically modern Christians should completely disregard Leviticus?
End Quote



I'm sure I could Google this, but I'm too lazy.  The way it was explained to me is that in the New Testament, Jesus died so that all the stuff in the Old Testament was cancelled out so everyone was forgiven for their sins (I probably got the semantics all wrong here).  

I agree with the people who say that this is primarily a religious argument, and it shouldn't have a place in a nation where church and state are supposed to be separate.  That doesn't mean that all religious ideals (i.e. don't kill people) are bad though.

Playing devil's advocate, if you look at the "right wing wacko" point of view, even though I don't think gay sex is "deviant" by any means (not that I practice it or anything), the language of the law may open it up for organizations like NAMBLA to justify raping little boys and for Farmer Joe Bob to justify banging his cow.  More realistically though, as previously stated, it could lead to unwanted restrictions of heterosexual rights.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Rice_Cube on 08/10/03 at 07:38 p.m.

I have nothing against gay rights, btw :)  I am friends with gays and lesbians alike and they are normal law-abiding people.  They just like having sex with different people than I do ;D

And when the philosophy reads "inalienable human rights", that applies to all humans :)

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/10/03 at 07:38 p.m.


Quoting:


I'm sure I could Google this, but I'm too lazy.  The way it was explained to me is that in the New Testament, Jesus died so that all the stuff in the Old Testament was cancelled out so everyone was forgiven for their sins (I probably got the semantics all wrong here).  

End Quote



So your saying xians should completely disregard the Old Testament altogether?

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Rice_Cube on 08/10/03 at 07:42 p.m.


Quoting:


So your saying xians should completely disregard the Old Testament altogether?
End Quote



Dunno man...I believe in God but I don't consider myself a Christian or a Jew.  I've read some of the Old Testament, and to be perfectly honest with you, it's really loopy.

The way it should be interpreted, in my humble opinion, is as a set of stories, and not as some written-in-stone religious doctrine.  I don't think there are enough sheep and pigeons in the world to sacrifice as prescribed in the Old Testament, anyway :P

I don't think it should be disregarded, I just think, from what I learned from others and what I read, that Jesus died for the sins of his followers and that includes all the stuff in the Old Testament.  

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/10/03 at 07:43 p.m.

Well, Hoeveel, not completely. Leviticus is still the Word of God and contains much that is useful. The New Testament states that  much of the Old Testament is to be used to learn from, sort of like a history lesson.

An example...
Levitical law demanded animals be sacrificed whenever someone sinned (broke a Levitical law). Clearly, Christians today do not make animal sacrifices. Christ sacrificed Himself once for all making animal sacrifice unneccessary. But we learn from the Levitical sacrifices that death is the penalty for sin. All sin. Any sin. God was trying to drill this into the heads of the ancient Israelites. Shedding of blood=remission of sin.

Sorry for going off-topic...but to tie this all together, Levitical law also tells us what is sin. Any Christian church that bases itself on the Word of God must stand firm that homosexual behavior is sin. This is also reiterated in the New Testament in Romans Chap. 1.

I have no problem with what two individuals do in the privacy of their own home. That is their business. But I think this issue is more about validation of a lifestyle than rights.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Harvey on 08/10/03 at 08:35 p.m.

Quoting:


Hi John, I would like to know where this reference is if you can tell me. I looked in Chap. 20 of Leviticus (where homosexual acts are condemned) and found nothing of the cloak thing.


End Quote


I heard it on the radio some time ago from someone who was advocating gay rights. I won't be able to cite where it was in the Bible. I just know I heard it on the radio. I do know that there are a lot of goofy laws in the Bible (Did you hear their extensive laws on who pays whom when a servant is gored by an Ox?)

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/10/03 at 08:55 p.m.

I've got a King James Version in .pdf format and i think i read something similar; something about not being able to wear two materials at the same time...i'll look it up now...

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: My_name_is_Kenny on 08/10/03 at 09:08 p.m.


Quoting:
I am friends with gays and lesbians alike and they are normal law-abiding people.  They just like having sex with different people than I do ;DEnd Quote



I know plenty of lesbians who like having sex with the same people as I do.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Rice_Cube on 08/10/03 at 09:09 p.m.


Quoting:


I know plenty of lesbians who like having sex with the same people as I do.
End Quote



Yes, I know...they have excellent taste in women 8)

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/10/03 at 09:12 p.m.

Sorry, got disconnected.  

Leviticus 19:19 says '...neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.'

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/11/03 at 03:52 a.m.

Thank you Hoeveel.

I have consulted two commentaries, here are a couple of possible reasons for this seemingly inane law...

1. The type of cloak spoken of may have been used in some idolatrous practices. Like, today wearing a white hood and robe would associate one with the KKK, but telling someone pre-KKK not to wear a white hood and robe may seem ridiculous to them.

2. God may have been stressing the purity of religion that he wanted them to achieve.

In any case, as said before, this book was written specifically for the post-Exodus Jewish nation at a time when Judaism was being defined.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: kayhepburn on 08/11/03 at 06:37 a.m.

I firmly believe that absolutely everyone should have equal rights.  How can anyone possibly justify discriminating against someone on the grounds of an innocent feeling they have??
There seems to be a widely held belief that people "choose" to be gay.  Believe me, one of my male friends is gay, and although he enjoys loving relationships from time to time, he feels life would have been easier if he were straight.  He is 60 and has been dating men since he was 16, yet has found it to diffcult to settle down.  He is really quite lonely.
I also firmly believe that a lot of people who vociferously oppose gays are trying to mask their own feelings at times.  Similar to the story line in American Beauty........
Also, how can the church, or anyone else for that matter say that being gay is ruining the old-fashioned notion of "family?"
If someone is happy in a straight relationship / family set-up, they are not going to leave it to become gay, just because its becoming more acceptable!
As a final point, one of my female friends had two straight marriages which were very unhappy and short.  She then gave in to her true feelings and started dating a woman.  They are still together and blissfully happy ten years on.
Surely a caring society would prefer someone to be genuinely happy, rather than being majorly depressed by denying themselves?
I know this post isn't really on the religious matter, the way this thread was going, but I just wanted to make these points on the whole "gay rights" issue.  I am as straight as the next person  ;), but cannot stand discrimination over something so harmless...........

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 08/11/03 at 07:05 a.m.

I agree that EVERYONE should have equal rights (pedophiles and the like are excluded).  As long as it isn't hurting anyone, why not?  Just because most religions believe that homosexuality is a sin?  Sorry, don't think so.  Last time I checked, there was supposed to be a separation between church and state.  Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs.  Who are we to tell someone that they are "wrong" for loving someone of the same sex and wanting to live their life with them as a married couple?  Let them marry, legally recognize it, and treat them as a married couple.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: 1992thousand on 08/11/03 at 08:32 a.m.

I don't think anyone should be able to tell you what you can or cannot do in the privacy of your own home. And imo, marriage is a word reserved for the bond between man and woman, if you want to make up some new word for the eternal bond between 2 men or 2 women that is EQUAL to a marriage, go ahead. Marriage isn't that word though.

As far as the Gay priest, hes an openly gay man, living with his partner, in a supposedly "Christian" church. All i have to say is, if that church chooses not to abide by their Bibles, they deserve any negative backlash they receive.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: XFiles_geek on 08/11/03 at 11:06 a.m.

Well, perhaps I'm a bit biased, me being gay and all, but I have to say that there is no rational basis for denying homosexuals basic human rights.

As for marriage, I'm tempted to say the government should just butt-out of marriage completely. But, since that won't happen, I'll say there's no reason why gays shouldn't be allowed to get married. And no, I don't buy this "marriage is a super special word that only heterosexuals can use" nonsense.  I'm not a superstitious person, not do I respond well to superstitious ideas. But since "gay marriage" is a long way off in the U.S., I'll say that I'd be happy with civil unions for now.

As for the gay bishop, I'm an atheist and I couldn't give a fig about what a bunch of churches do.




Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Seminal on 08/11/03 at 02:09 p.m.

I think gays want too many "extra" or "special" rights. I think that is why many people are tired of supporting their cause. The best example would be with those "special" criminal laws, which says that if you hit someone who is not a homosexual you get one set of penalties, but if you hit someone who is a homosexual you get a different set of penalties. If gays want to be the same, then they should stop asking for "extra" benifits. As for marrige, why do gays need that word so much? What is wrong with "civil union"? As long as they get the same benifits, why do they want to take a word which describes a man and woman's commitment and change the definition? It is an attack on normal relationships. It has more to do with homosexual interest groups generating money by creating controversy. Gays are being victimized by their own support groups. Homosexual special interest groups are about to become as bad as those "christian republican youth" groups. You know, the ones who try and shove god down your throat by teaching creationism in public schools. Gays are adopting the same tactics.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Harvey on 08/11/03 at 08:40 p.m.

Quoting:
I think gays want too many "extra" or "special" rights. I think that is why many people are tired of supporting their cause. The best example would be with those "special" criminal laws, which says that if you hit someone who is not a homosexual you get one set of penalties, but if you hit someone who is a homosexual you get a different set of penalties. If gays want to be the same, then they should stop asking for "extra" benifits. As for marrige, why do gays need that word so much? What is wrong with "civil union"? As long as they get the same benifits, why do they want to take a word which describes a man and woman's commitment and change the definition? It is an attack on normal relationships. It has more to do with homosexual interest groups generating money by creating controversy. Gays are being victimized by their own support groups. Homosexual special interest groups are about to become as bad as those "christian republican youth" groups. You know, the ones who try and shove god down your throat by teaching creationism in public schools. Gays are adopting the same tactics.
End Quote


That's awfully harsh. Just because marriage should apply to same sex partners, you throw them in with the Christian right? That's hardly fair. They aren't overriding the first ammendment to force their beliefs on anyone.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: CatwomanofV on 08/11/03 at 09:04 p.m.

Long before the Civil Unions act was even thought about, DC and I attended a gay "marriage"-in fact, DC officated. Since it wasn't legal, it really didn't matter. It was just two woman who wanted to commit to each other. After the Civil Unions Act did pass, they did became C.U.ed offically. I was very glad that the Civil Unions Act did pass but I feel that gays should be granted full-fledge marriage. The argument against same-sex marriages has been that it would destroy the institution of marriage. I just don't understand that. I don't understand how two people who are committed to each other who happen to be the same sex will affect my up-coming marriage to the man that I am committed to.

I have a niece who wants to get C.U.ed to her partner. Of course I would be very offended if I am NOT invited to the ceremony. She was a bit afraid to come out of the closet because of the way her mother reacted but she realized that my side of the family really could care less. If she is happy, that is all that matters.


Cat

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Seminal on 08/12/03 at 01:28 a.m.


Quoting:

That's awfully harsh. Just because marriage should apply to same sex partners, you throw them in with the Christian right? That's hardly fair. They aren't overriding the first ammendment to force their beliefs on anyone.
End Quote



That comment about "young christian rebublicans" was not aimed at homosexuals. It was aimed at the special interest groups which "advocate" their interests. The more I look at special interest groups in general, the more evil I see. These groups get to a point, where their purpose is continued sustainment of the group, not advocacy of the cause. They need to collect money, so they come up with something to tick off their base, and in comes the money. From what I see on TV and read in the papers, it appears the gay special interest groups and right wing special interest groups use the same tactics. My whole point was, if gays get a civil union with all the same benifits as married people, then they won. What is in a word, why fight over a word? I think it is the special interest groups tossing gasoline on a fire.

I guess I am just tired of gay people who think they have to convince everyone their lifestyle is good. When was the last time you saw a parade of heterosexual people celebrating thier sexuality? If one passed down my street, I would think someone had a screw lose. Let the sex part get back in the bedroom and out of public policy.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Bobby on 08/12/03 at 05:27 a.m.

The only thing with the Gay rights that I thought was a bit wrong was when this bloke in Britain (I forgotten his name) was trying to force celebrities to 'come out of the closet'.

I'm not sure what everybody else thinks but I think that is a violation of people's privacy. I think the Gay rights shot themselves in the foot a little there.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Don_Carlos on 08/12/03 at 02:47 p.m.

I absolutely agree that people should keep their sexuality in the bedroom, the kitchen, the living room, the den, wherever they want to do it (as they say in Vermont, just don't do it in the street and scare the horses).  And why should any couple not be able to gain legal recognition for their union from the state?  What religions do is up to them, but the state should be neutral, and should recognize any union between consenting adults regardless of biblical injuctions, interpretations, or whatever.  We live in a secular state, not a theocracy.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/12/03 at 05:29 p.m.


Quoting:
I don't think anyone should be able to tell you what you can or cannot do in the privacy of your own home. And imo, marriage is a word reserved for the bond between man and woman, if you want to make up some new word for the eternal bond between 2 men or 2 women that is EQUAL to a marriage, go ahead. Marriage isn't that word though.
End Quote



Well, in my opinion, it's just a word.  'Marry' just means to 'join together'; when you pull a zip up, the two sides 'marry'.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Rice_Cube on 08/12/03 at 05:31 p.m.


Quoting:


Well, in my opinion, it's just a word.  'Marry' just means to 'join together'; when you pull a zip up, the two sides 'marry'.
End Quote



They're gonna have to change the dictionary definition then.

Personally I think that gays should be allowed to commit to each other and be in a legal union.  But I'm skeptical over calling it "marriage".

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Bobby on 08/12/03 at 05:40 p.m.

Quoting:
They're gonna have to change the dictionary definition then.

Personally I think that gays should be allowed to commit to each other and be in a legal union.  But I'm skeptical over calling it "marriage".
End Quote



This is quite interesting, Rice. Why are you sceptical over calling two homosexuals 'joining together' a marriage?

I'm not challenging you. I'm interested in your views.  :)

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Rice_Cube on 08/12/03 at 05:47 p.m.


Quoting:


This is quite interesting, Rice. Why are you sceptical over calling two homosexuals 'joining together' a marriage?

I'm not challenging you. I'm interested in your views.  :)
End Quote



It's semantics, really.  Marriage has for the longest time been defined as between a man and a woman.  If Oxford or Webster decided to change that tomorrow, though, that's their call :)

I really don't care one way or the other :)  If they're in love and they wanna commit, go for it.  The union should be legal; the wording is something that will probably be debated for a long time though.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/12/03 at 05:50 p.m.

What's wrong with reserving 'holy matrimony' for straights (if you really need a 'special' word for it  ::) )?

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Bobby on 08/12/03 at 05:51 p.m.

Quoting:
It's semantics, really.  Marriage has for the longest time been defined as between a man and a woman.  If Oxford or Webster decided to change that tomorrow, though, that's their call :)End Quote



Okey dokey. I was just curious.  :)

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Bobby on 08/12/03 at 05:55 p.m.

Quoting:
What's wrong with reserving 'holy matrimony' for straights (if you really need a 'special' word for it  ::) )?
End Quote



Maybe homosexuals would feel like they are being patronised to some degree. The only analogy I can give is if two people had cars, instead of calling them both 'cars', I would call one an old banger and the other a posh Porsche.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/12/03 at 06:06 p.m.

Actually, while i'm unsure of Webster or Oxford (it's aaaall the way downstairs  ::) ), in the Dictionary.com definition it says:

1. ...
   d. A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage.

The original had italics too.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/12/03 at 06:09 p.m.


Quoting:


Maybe homosexuals would feel like they are being patronised to some degree. The only analogy I can give is if two people had cars, instead of calling them both 'cars', I would call one an old banger and the other a posh Porsche.
End Quote



Nah, i'm just saying if 1992thousand doesn't like using the same word for straight and queer marriages then they can use 'holy matrimony'.  Personally, i'd just say 'marriage'.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: CatwomanofV on 08/12/03 at 06:10 p.m.

The word marriage is not just used in terms of people. I have heard businesses use the word when talking about a merger.





Cat

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Harvey on 08/12/03 at 08:51 p.m.

Quoting:
The word marriage is not just used in terms of people. I have heard businesses use the word when talking about a merger.


End Quote


So much for ruining the sanctity of the word.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Goreripper on 08/13/03 at 02:12 a.m.

This issue is much too serious to become bogged down in an argument over semantics. Whether we know the exact dictionary definition of "marry" or "marriage" or not, most of us know what it implies, and for most of us the implication is a legal union between two people. So instead of arguing over the semantics, let's clear the air: the issue is about the legality of same-sex marriages (whatever the word means), it's about the rights of homosexual couples to be legally united in matrimony. And I think they should have that right.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/13/03 at 03:47 a.m.


Quoting:

So much for ruining the sanctity of the word.
End Quote



Think about what we are discussing here. You are worried about ruining the sanctity of a word?

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Harvey on 08/13/03 at 06:16 a.m.

Quoting:


Think about what we are discussing here. You are worried about ruining the sanctity of a word?
End Quote


I was being sarcastic. People were arguing that 'marriage' was a sacred term that could only apply to the union of two people of the opposite sex. Somehow the word was 'holy'. Hearing Cat's statement, to me, the sanctity is kind of ruined if the term 'marriage' is used by corporate goons.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: goodsin on 08/13/03 at 08:08 a.m.


Quoting:


How much time do ya have... ;)
End Quote


Hi 'fish. I perceive from your mails you may be quite hot on the Christian scene, just wondering where the Creeping Death lyrics fit into your perspective...not getting at you, just interested ( I thought they were blashphemous from an Xian perspective??)

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/13/03 at 10:02 a.m.


Quoting:

I was being sarcastic. People were arguing that 'marriage' was a sacred term that could only apply to the union of two people of the opposite sex. Somehow the word was 'holy'. Hearing Cat's statement, to me, the sanctity is kind of ruined if the term 'marriage' is used by corporate goons.
End Quote



I understand now, John. Sorry that one went over my head.

Quoting:
Hi 'fish. I perceive from your mails you may be quite hot on the Christian scene, just wondering where the Creeping Death lyrics fit into your perspective...not getting at you, just interested ( I thought they were blashphemous from an Xian perspective??) End Quote



Hi goodsin. Actually I am a rabid Christian...watch out for my bite!! Grrrrrr!!! Just kidding. ;D

Anyway, I used to be a rabid Metallica fan. Until they sold out of course... I think the song which I quote in my avatar, "Creeping Death", is a pretty accurate recounting of the events leading up to the exodus of Israel out of Egypt, for a secular band. Are you familiar with it? The song is sung from the perspective (loosely) of the Angel of Death, whom God sent to claim the first-born of the Egyptians because of pharoah's stubborness. The lyrics aren't blasphemous at all.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: goodsin on 08/13/03 at 10:57 a.m.


Quoting:


I think the song which I quote in my avatar, "Creeping Death", is a pretty accurate recounting of the events leading up to the exodus of Israel out of Egypt, for a secular band. Are you familiar with it? The song is sung from the perspective (loosely) of the Angel of Death, whom God sent to claim the first-born of the Egyptians because of pharoah's stubborness. The lyrics aren't blasphemous at all.
End Quote



Sorry 'fish. I think it's my knowledge of the OT that's failing me, rather than my knowledge of Metallica. Seems like Metallica, upon reflection, draw their 'inspiration' from a number of religious sources; strange, as you say, that this song appears to be technically a 'song of praise' to Old Testament events. Can't see it getting sung in many religious establishments, though...

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 08/13/03 at 11:17 a.m.


Quoting:


Sorry 'fish. I think it's my knowledge of the OT that's failing me, rather than my knowledge of Metallica. Seems like Metallica, upon reflection, draw their 'inspiration' from a number of religious sources; strange, as you say, that this song appears to be technically a 'song of praise' to Old Testament events. Can't see it getting sung in many religious establishments, though...
End Quote



I might go to church again, if they did ;D

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Don_Carlos on 08/13/03 at 01:51 p.m.


Quoting:


I might go to church again, if they did ;D
End Quote



Not being a biblical scholar, or even a believer, I may be out of line here, but isn't there something about "making a joyful noise unto the Lord"?
As a teenager, my family was invited to a Black Baptist church social by one of my dad's crew (he was a foreman).  At first I felt a bit out of place, but the music was fernetic, and while I didn't sing (can't carry a tune in a basket), I did get into the clapping and drumming - I do "got rythem" - and soon felt right at home, especially when one VERY CUTE girl asked me to dance.  

Neither of us were gay though (back on topic ???)  ;)

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Harvey on 08/13/03 at 04:20 p.m.

Quoting:

Neither of us were gay though (back on topic ???)  ;)
End Quote


Nice save. I'll try and recover even more. Questions for the masses: Yes or no to gay marriage? Yes or no to civil unions?

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/13/03 at 05:00 p.m.

What's the difference between a marriage and a civil union anyway?

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/13/03 at 07:42 p.m.

Quoting:


Not being a biblical scholar, or even a believer, I may be out of line here, but isn't there something about "making a joyful noise unto the Lord"?
As a teenager, my family was invited to a Black Baptist church social by one of my dad's crew (he was a foreman).  At first I felt a bit out of place, but the music was fernetic, and while I didn't sing (can't carry a tune in a basket), I did get into the clapping and drumming - I do "got rythem" - and soon felt right at home, especially when one VERY CUTE girl asked me to dance.  

Neither of us were gay though (back on topic ???)  ;)
End Quote



Psalm 98:4 "Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all the earth: make a loud noise, and rejoice, and sing praise."

Amen, Don Carlos, and you are not out of line. This is only one of about 7 scriptures I found about joyful noises. I love a worship service with loud, upbeat music and hand clapping. I think the Lord does too. Church should not sound (or look) like a morgue. We serve a living God...WOOOO HOOOO!!!!!

Quoting:

Nice save. I'll try and recover even more. Questions for the masses: Yes or no to gay marriage? Yes or no to civil unions?
End Quote



Fair enough, John Harvey...count me as a no vote on both versions.

*Modified cuz I credited the wrong person with the above quote!!*

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Harvey on 08/13/03 at 09:52 p.m.

Quoting:
Fair enough, John Harvey...count me as a no vote on both versions.

*Modified cuz I credited the wrong person with the above quote!!*

End Quote


I vote yes on both. I think it's good to encourage commitment among same sex couples. I would prefer that 'marriage' be okayed. Civil Union sounds like a secondary status. We're all loving children in God/Allah/Jimmy's eyes. Let the wedding bells ring!

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 08/14/03 at 07:38 a.m.


Quoting:


Not being a biblical scholar, or even a believer, I may be out of line here, but isn't there something about "making a joyful noise unto the Lord"?
As a teenager, my family was invited to a Black Baptist church social by one of my dad's crew (he was a foreman).  At first I felt a bit out of place, but the music was fernetic, and while I didn't sing (can't carry a tune in a basket), I did get into the clapping and drumming - I do "got rythem" - and soon felt right at home, especially when one VERY CUTE girl asked me to dance.  

Neither of us were gay though (back on topic ???)  ;)
End Quote



I meant if they played Metallica, which many churches in MY area believe is the "music of the devil".  Welcome to the land of bars and churches ::)  (in my hometown of 5000, there were 16 churches and 15 bars)

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/14/03 at 12:08 a.m.


Quoting:


Psalm 98:4 "Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all the earth: make a loud noise, and rejoice, and sing praise."

End Quote



Didn't some forms of Christianity try to ban music?  I'm sure some early variation that came to Scotland tried to.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Don_Carlos on 08/14/03 at 03:43 p.m.


Quoting:


I meant if they played Metallica, which many churches in MY area believe is the "music of the devil".  Welcome to the land of bars and churches ::)  (in my hometown of 5000, there were 16 churches and 15 bars)
End Quote



Yeah, churches that sprang from John Calvin (Puritans) tend to ignore those "joyfull noise" passages.  I guess that's what you get for living in the "heartland".  What can I say  ;D  (Maybe you should woirship in the bars  ;))

As to Gay Marriage, I'm all for it.  Gays and Lesb. are often portrayed as promiscuious, and I guess fundamentalists want to keep them that way, or at least keep the ability to stereotype them that way.

Remember the old folk song "Where Heve All the Flowers Gone?"?  The chorous goes "When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn?"

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/14/03 at 07:06 p.m.


Quoting:


Didn't some forms of Christianity try to ban music?  I'm sure some early variation that came to Scotland tried to.
End Quote



I'm sure they did too . There are still some churches today that frown on any music at all in service, tho I am not sure what denominations. If only they would read their bibles... ::)

Quoting:
Yeah, churches that sprang from John Calvin (Puritans) tend to ignore those "joyfull noise" passages.End Quote



That's funny, because I find myself becoming more of a Calvinist these days!!

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/14/03 at 07:16 p.m.


Quoting:

As to Gay Marriage, I'm all for it.  Gays and Lesb. are often portrayed as promiscuious, and I guess fundamentalists want to keep them that way, or at least keep the ability to stereotype them that way.

End Quote



Heterosexuals are often promiscuous too, maybe more so than gays, maybe not. Marriage certainly is not a guarantee against promiscuity, although one might imagine it would curtail it a bit!! ;D

Anyway, as a Christian, it really does not matter what I say about homosexual behavior. What matters is what God says about it. And God is against it, so I must also be against it. I know that many don't believe in the bible as the Word of God, and that's their choice. I guess I just wanted to clarify why I say no to gay marriage/union.

Subject: Gay Rights!

Written By: ZakkTheFaerie on 08/16/03 at 03:53 a.m.


~*~
okay, so maybe i'm biased on the subject, but...

the whole notion of "god" punishing his children to burn in a fiery hell forever all because they loved one gender over the other is...  incomprehensible.  unless "god" is a schizo.

afterall - whoo, he's so loving, he's so wonderful, so fabulous...  but then at same time he's vengeful.  and in a way, cruel and heartless.  after all, doesn't creating something, and then condemning that same creation to eternal damnation because of the way you created it seem a bit sadistic to you?

and do believe me - homosexuality is not a choice.  no one sits down and says to themselves "hmm.  i think i want to be hated for who i am.  i want to live a life of being ostracized and persecuted.  i want to live my life knowing that every night a homophobe could decide to kill me just cause i love in a different way than he does!  that sure sounds swell!"

obviously, i'm pro gay marriage.  and not civil unions...  the government needs to call them the same thing - because we aren't a theocracy.  the bible may say marriage is between a man and a woman, but the government should have no concern with the bible.  that's the point of this whole constitution thing we've got, you know?  therefore, it's the same thing for everyone, or, the government should have no concern with marriages period.

canada looks more appealing each and every day as the backwards loonies of the religious right pull so many strings in our sad excuse for a democracy.

Subject: Re: Gay Rights!

Written By: Bobby on 08/16/03 at 08:14 a.m.

Quoting:afterall - whoo, he's so loving, he's so wonderful, so fabulous...  but then at same time he's vengeful.  and in a way, cruel and heartless.  after all, doesn't creating something, and then condemning that same creation to eternal damnation because of the way you created it seem a bit sadistic to you?End Quote



It's one of my religious conundrums I've not been able to answer. It seems to me that God is a vengeful God in the Old Testament and in the New Testament he is a 'God of Love' - that is until he gets to Revelation. It's like we are talking about two different people or something - maybe Gamblefish could help us out there . . .

Quoting:and do believe me - homosexuality is not a choice.  no one sits down and says to themselves "hmm.  i think i want to be hated for who i am.  i want to live a life of being ostracized and persecuted.  i want to live my life knowing that every night a homophobe could decide to kill me just cause i love in a different way than he does!  that sure sounds swell!" End Quote



Zakk, There is a lot of ignorance in the world on many levels.
My irritation is not with homosexuality but with the Church in general (any denomination). On the one hand they say 'man should not lie with man' and then they take the mickey out of the scriptures by going against it! That is not mentioning the choir boy incidences of the 90s.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: DizzleJ on 08/16/03 at 09:52 a.m.

.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Junior on 08/16/03 at 11:10 a.m.


Quoting:
First of all being Gay is truly a choice. Homosexuality is a way of life, not a genetic defect that you are born with and you just cannot help... End Quote



I see words but I don't see any evidence to support them there words.... :P

I guess the only reliable source to determine if "homosexuality is a choice" would be a homosexual himself/herself. You, nor I, have experienced homosexuality therefore it is unlogical then we could determine the answer to whether homosexuality is a choice.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Seminal on 08/16/03 at 11:18 a.m.


Quoting:


I see words but I don't see any evidence to support them there words.... :P

I guess the only reliable source to determine if "homosexuality is a choice" would be a homosexual himself/herself. You, nor I, have experienced homosexuality therefore it is unlogical then we could determine the answer to whether homosexuality is a choice.
End Quote



I think it is a choice too. I have not seen any evidence saying there is a genetic reason for homosexuality. And up til a few years ago, homosexuality was listed as an ilness by pscyhologists. Everyone thinks it is disgusting, but we try and allow it on the basis of "live and let live". The problem with gays is they will not just go and live. They have to convince everyone else their devient lifestyle is normal. To me, that speaks volumes about it being a choice.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Bobby on 08/16/03 at 02:44 p.m.

Quoting:Also to clarify God hates the sin not the sinner. He loves everybody all the same no matter what you do. However, He has established commandments which are very clear to anyone who has actually read the bible. End Quote



I totally agree DizzleJ.

Quoting:Homosexuality is a choice . . . Some sickos out there could probably claim that Buggery is a choice to. (Buggery is having sex with another animal Like a Woman and Horse.)
Now come on folks, The same reasons gays say they are gay could be applied to those who practice Buggery! But, you all probably think Buggery is sick and unnatural! Right! Well so do I, and I think the same about homosexuality. Makes ma wanna vomit and it is just plain unnatural!
End Quote



Buggery can be a sexual part of homosexuality but you also have to respect the decisions people make (I'm not arguing whether homosexual people have a choice). I don't like the prospect of being sodomized myself but we should not tell a homosexual how to act in their consenting private lives. We do not have the right to dictate.

Subject: Re: Gay Rights!

Written By: gamblefish on 08/16/03 at 05:51 p.m.

Hi Zakk. It seems you have a misunderstanding about what the God of the bible is like, so I will try to clear some things up.

Quoting:

~*~

the whole notion of "god" punishing his children to burn in a fiery hell forever all because they loved one gender over the other is...  incomprehensible.  unless "god" is a schizo.End Quote



Actually, we all have sinned. Doesn't really matter what the sin is to God, all sin is punishable by death. That's why Christ came, to pay the death penalty for us. All we have to do is put our faith in Christ and we are exonerated.

Quoting:

afterall - whoo, he's so loving, he's so wonderful, so fabulous...  but then at same time he's vengeful.  and in a way, cruel and heartless.  after all, doesn't creating something, and then condemning that same creation to eternal damnation because of the way you created it seem a bit sadistic to you?
End Quote



God is a loving God, but at the same time He demands justice. He laid down the law, all you have to do is keep it. Of course, it is impossible to keep the whole law, as said before, we have all broken it (sinned). Unfair, huh? But wait...God decided to come to earth in human form and fulfill the law for us. Now, faith in Christ saves us from the punishment for our sin...death.


Quoting:

and do believe me - homosexuality is not a choice.  no one sits down and says to themselves "hmm.  i think i want to be hated for who i am.  i want to live a life of being ostracized and persecuted.  i want to live my life knowing that every night a homophobe could decide to kill me just cause i love in a different way than he does!  that sure sounds swell!"
End Quote



Homosexual behavior is a choice. It starts in the mind, which of course controls the body. Some may have more of a tendency towards it than others, because of certain events in their lives. When you start down such a path, your first concerns are not what the consequences might be or how others might treat you. Your first concern is your own desire and how to fulfill it and to hell with the consequences.  


Quoting:

obviously, i'm pro gay marriage.  and not civil unions...  the government needs to call them the same thing - because we aren't a theocracy.  the bible may say marriage is between a man and a woman, but the government should have no concern with the bible.  that's the point of this whole constitution thing we've got, you know?  therefore, it's the same thing for everyone, or, the government should have no concern with marriages period.


End Quote



That's fine for you, it's your body and you can do with it what you want. But for now, I believe that the majority of Americans are not ready for same-sex unions. I may be wrong. But I also feel that wide-spread acceptance of same-sex unions is growing, and before long I would not be suprised to see same-sex unions performed in every state.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: ZakkTheFaerie on 08/16/03 at 06:06 p.m.

Quoting:Also to clarify God hates the sin not the sinner. He loves everybody all the same no matter what you do. However, He has established commandments which are very clear to anyone who has actually read the bible.
Above all on this topic being called Gay rights:
This is an Oxymoron! The only rights they have are inherent rights that everybody else has. Homosexuality is a choice. I could be gay if I wanted but I Like girls and I believe that it is unatural.
If you want a more scientific answer as to why Homosexuality is in and of itself a wrong thing, just think about nature. And your physical body. Men were made to fertilize a Woman's egg. And Woman are made to be fertilzed. To be blunt, Woman are meant to be penetrated and men are meant to petetrate them. Take a health class on Sex 101. A man's organs are not meant to mix with another man's organsEnd Quote



Someone has mentioned this before, but along with the whole "man shall not lie with man" thing, there are several other rules in Leviticus, such as the not wearing a cloak of more than two fabrics thing...  so, I suppose anyone who's ever worn polyester is just as bad as every gay guy.
Second of all, COULD you be gay if you wanted?  this is the thing - if tommorrow YOU may the so-called "choice" to be gay, could you suddenly start beign turned on by men?  Since later you mention it makes you wanna vomit, I don't suppose you could.  Obviously, it's not a choice for you.  You were born to like girls.  We were born to like guys.  The idea of having intercourse with a woman disgusts me just as much our ways do to you.   :P
Finally, sorry to be overly-explicit here, but I think this point must be made - if god created bodies to fit together in certain ways, why oh why would he make it feel so incredbly wonderful to have your prostate toyed with?  After all - only men have one.  And the only way to reach it is through the arse...  and god put it there.

Quoting:I may be wrong. But I also feel that wide-spread acceptance of same-sex unions is growing, and before long I would not be suprised to see same-sex unions performed in every stateEnd Quote



I'm quite pleased to say that you're right about that.  Look at television and the ever-growing (popular!) programming with gays...  just one sign that the public in general is learning to accept homosexuality, we've already taken great strides.  The best way to compare it is with the civil rights movement concerning blacks...  they started off as slaves, and now, by most, are considered equal fellow human beings.  of course there are still the neo-nazis and kkk and the other crazies still anti-blacks, but in general they are considered equal.  now the same thing is happening for gays...  of course there will always be the crazies like the radical-right and the rabid bible-beaters, but in general people are starting to understand homosexuality is a normal part of life...  After all, we're almost 1 out of 5 people...  and as it's accepted more, more are going to come out, and the fear and misunderstanding will grow ever smaller.  ^_^  and just remember - if you're so sickened by it, think of your family.  you've almost certainly got one...  they may be a niece or a cousin or an uncle or someone, but you've probably got one.  ;)

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: ZakkTheFaerie on 08/16/03 at 06:26 p.m.

don't know how to do the quotes right, but John_Seminal wrote this...

Quoting:I think it is a choice too. I have not seen any evidence saying there is a genetic reason for homosexuality. And up til a few years ago, homosexuality was listed as an ilness by pscyhologists. Everyone thinks it is disgusting, but we try and allow it on the basis of "live and let live". The problem with gays is they will not just go and live. They have to convince everyone else their devient lifestyle is normal. To me, that speaks volumes about it being a choice. End Quote



I don't know if you mean 30 as being "a few" but psychologists declassified homosexuality as a mental illness in 1973.  Thirty years ago.  And with the field of psychology being a relatively new science, of course it's going to be refined, and better understood everyday.  And they realized they were wrong about calling it a mental illness thirty years ago.  And, there is no evidence about it being a choice, either.  Once again, I'd like to draw the parellel with African-Americans.  It was decided they weren't slaves over a hundred years ago.  However, people still didn't  believe they were equal human beings...  so rather than lying low and just "going to live", they protested, they rallied, they wanted to be thought of as humans, not sub-class creatures "allowed" to exist.  And homosexuality is the same way.  And, I'm sorry to tell you this, but "everyone" doesn't think it's disgusting.  You're the minority in your small-mindedness now.  My generation more than ever refuses to live in a world full of bigotry, conformity and control by forces such as the Church.  My generation wants to live, it wants to experience life, and it wants to throw off the chains...  all the hundreds of young gays, goths, freaks, punks feminists, ravers, vegans, and the dozens of other groups who are tired of the close-minded status quo are going to be adults, and the elderly bigots are going to start dropping like flies...  there'll be some to replace them of course, but the fact is, we're winning.  ;D  

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Seminal on 08/16/03 at 07:13 p.m.

Quoting:
all the hundreds of young gays, goths, freaks, punks feminists, ravers, vegans, and the dozens of other groups who are tired of the close-minded status quo are going to be adults, and the elderly bigots are going to start dropping like flies...
End Quote



Modified to add: I think it is wrong for anyone to say another group should "drop like flies". Government should not go into the bedroom. Just like homosexuals should not go on the streets proclaiming they have a cause "like the black slaves did". The two are nothing alike. If you think your life as a homosexual parallels the life of a slave, then you should talk to someone who has really been discriminated against.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/16/03 at 07:20 p.m.


Quoting:
Now come on folks, The same reasons gays say they are gay could be applied to those who practice Buggery!


End Quote



You are correct DizzleJ. The widespread acceptance of homosexuality as normal will lead to acceptance of beastiality, pedophilia and the like.


Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/16/03 at 07:22 p.m.


Quoting:
 And, I'm sorry to tell you this, but "everyone" doesn't think it's disgusting.   
End Quote



Unfortunately, the more the homosexual agenda is shoved down the throat of America, the more the American people  are swallowing this lie.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Harvey on 08/16/03 at 09:31 p.m.

Quoting:
What matters is what God says about it. And God is against it, so I must also be against it.
End Quote


The Bible, which is written by man, can not always be taken literally. At least, my Church teaches that one cannot take passages out of the Bible to justify harassment towards homosexuals (and non-submissive women for that matter).

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Junior on 08/16/03 at 09:43 p.m.


Quoting:


You are correct DizzleJ. The widespread acceptance of homosexuality as normal will lead to acceptance of beastiality, pedophilia and the like.



End Quote



I must say I disagree with that...homosexuality and pedophilia are two totally-different things, I don't understand how you can compare the two.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Mike_Florio on 08/16/03 at 09:50 p.m.

how I feel...

people wanna go to hell, let them go...Im not anti-gay anything, let them be around, I dont care...less people means a lot less problems...

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: ZakkTheFaerie on 08/16/03 at 10:14 p.m.

Quoting:You are correct DizzleJ. The widespread acceptance of homosexuality as normal will lead to acceptance of beastiality, pedophilia and the like.
End Quote



What is it with Christians?  Just because two adult human beings who are the same gender can love each other, all of a sudden you start goign on about animals!  children!  dead people!  etc. etc. etc.  it's absolutely absurd.  Consensual sex between two men or two women is completely different from child molestation and beastiality.  10-20% of the world is gay.  And yet you think the next logical step is "people are gonna want to start marrying animals".  completely incredibly absurd.

Quoting:Unfortunately, the more the homosexual agenda is shoved down the throat of America, the more the American people  are swallowing this lie. End Quote



Hmm, at first in your posts you tried to appear civil.  Now you're showing your true colors, an old-fashioned bible-beating bigot.  "the homosexual agenda".  how classic.  you must like to see innocent people get killed, and school children committing suicide.  after all - the gay community is standing up and saying "we are people too."  they're saying that they shouldn't be tied to fences and brutally maimed.  they're saying they shouldn't have to watch other gay teens kill themselves because they can't stand being the subject of so much hate!  the "agenda" is trying to end the violence, trying to make sure that all humans of all races, genders, sexualities are treated equally and respected.  but obviously you don't care about real peoples' lives.  you're more concerned with following the silly laws of some archaic book (You never answered me on this - DO YOU WEAR POLYESTER?) than seeing that ALL humans with good in their hearts are treated fairly.  

but it's okay.  as i said, you're a slowly dying breed.  the Hypocrisy and Hatred of the Church is ensuring its own downfall.  You will keep shooting yourself in the foot until no one at all will continue to worship your god of hate and bigotry. ;D

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: DizzleJ on 08/16/03 at 10:26 p.m.

.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hairspray on 08/16/03 at 10:40 p.m.

I too will step in and ask that all of you try and respect each other's opinions or at least remain civil.

If you have something to say as to why you agree or disagree with an opinion, remember to direct your commentary towards the subject - not the person.

http://www.inthe80s.com/rules.shtml

Thank you.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: ZakkTheFaerie on 08/16/03 at 10:58 p.m.

Quoting:Don't you realize that nobody has made a comment that would be consisdered Biggotry?! With that comment above YOU are being the BIGOT! You are disrespecting every Christian around. And I might add, God is not a bigot nor does he hate you or anyone else on the Earth. He hates your choice of being Gay.
Anyway, could you please settle down? Don't wish quick death on all who disagree with you. Nobody wished that Gays would die, or that they were a "Dieing Breed'.
End Quote



first, i never said i hoped or wished anyone would die...  my reference to "a dying breed" was not death in the physical sense.  i meant that there are less and less people every day who blindly follow the church and accept their close-minded ways as gospel.

also - there are many christians i respect, for there are a great many who have begun to think for themselves, and realize that the idea of a god who would people to eternal damnation just because they love their same gender is utterly ridiculous.  fishie's comment about the "Gay agenda" being "shoved down people's throats" was very disrespectful.  gays are people who are trying to earn the right to LIVE, the right to NOT live in fear of death, in fear of brutality, in fear or persecution and hatred.  in the majority of U.S. states it is still legal to fire someone because they are gay.  and he believes that we are wrong for trying to be treated as human beings.  straights don't have to have parades and activist groups because THEY HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR.  It's easy for a white-bread christian male to say "what are they so uppity about?" because they've never had to face discrimination a day in his whole life.  we can't choose our sexuality anymore that a black man can choose the color of his skin, and you all simply say "pish posh" because it's easier to conduct your own arguments that way, and I ask you, well, when did you choose to be straight?  the same day i chose to be gay!  you didn't.  and i didn't.  as i mentioned but you simply ignore, you could decide to become gay tomorrow as easily as i could decide to become straight.

Quoting:When you start down such a path, your first concerns are not what the consequences might be or how others might treat you. Your first concern is your own desire and how to fulfill it and to hell with the consequences.  End Quote


our own desire?  nonsense.  every fifteen minutes, a gay teenager commits suicide.  because, when you begin to develop and realize that you can't like the opposite gender, your first concern is FAR from fulfilling a desire for sex with your own gender.  your first concern is "what if my parents don't love me anymore?  what i get killed?  how am i going to go to school every day and walk through the hallways as other students yell "fag" or dyke" at me?  how am i going to survive the constant beatings?  how am i going to survive when my parents kick me onto the streets because they don't want a queer for a son?"  and many of them, unable to face having this forced upon them, take their own lives rather than live in a world of hatred.  the first thing you THINK of is the consequences...  and your inability to avoid them because face it - god made you this way.

Quoting:God is not a bigot nor does he hate you or anyone else on the Earth. He hates your choice of being Gay.
End Quote


as far as the "god hates the act, not the one who acts", why would a fair god hate an act of love?  the way i see god, his only beef is with people who HARM other people.  who are gays harming?  absolutely no one.  so it's still ridiculous.  

in any case, perhaps i am a bigot in my own way, but i'm bigoted against organizations that play a role in the death of hundreds of my kin.  and i don't see anything wrong with THAT.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: ZakkTheFaerie on 08/16/03 at 11:02 p.m.


Quoting:
I too will step in and ask that all of you try and respect each other's opinions or at least remain civil.

If you have something to say as to why you agree or disagree with an opinion, remember to direct your commentary towards the subject - not the person.
End Quote



i apologize.  ;D  i get a bit heated when it comes to this topic.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/17/03 at 06:34 a.m.


Quoting:

The Bible, which is written by man, can not always be taken literally. At least, my Church teaches that one cannot take passages out of the Bible to justify harassment towards homosexuals (and non-submissive women for that matter).

End Quote



John, I never said homosexuals were to be harassed. The bible, which was written by God, does not teach this.

Quoting:
I must say I disagree with that...homosexuality and pedophilia are two totally-different things, I don't understand how you can compare the two. End Quote



Junior, I never said they were the same thing. The point I am making here is that acceptance of one thing leads to acceptance of another. We accepted "free love" (read promiscuity) in the 60's and 70's, homosexuality in the 80's and beyond. The next natural step in this progression is the acceptance of pedophilia and the like.

Quoting:
Hmm, at first in your posts you tried to appear civil.  Now you're showing your true colors, an old-fashioned bible-beating bigot.End Quote



Zakk, did it take you that long to figure out I am a "Bible beater"? Old fashioned? Naw, just old. ;D Bigot? Read on.


Quoting:
"the homosexual agenda".  how classic.  you must like to see innocent people get killed, and school children committing suicide.  after all - the gay community is standing up and saying "we are people too."  they're saying that they shouldn't be tied to fences and brutally maimed.  they're saying they shouldn't have to watch other gay teens kill themselves because they can't stand being the subject of so much hate!  End Quote



No, Zakk, I don't like to see people killed. You are taking liberties with what I have posted. Please don't jump to conclusions that have no merit. And yes, gays are people to, and are deserving of rights. Fact is, they already have the same rights as everyone else, except for the right to legally marry. There are already laws against the violence you described. I think much of the violence is brought on by the gay community, when in essence they stand up and shout, "Hey, I'm gay and you better like it!!". Forcing someone to believe in something they don't riles them up...just look at how people react to Christian evangelism... :P

Quoting:
you're more concerned with following the silly laws of some archaic book (You never answered me on this - DO YOU WEAR POLYESTER?) than seeing that ALL humans with good in their hearts are treated fairly.  End Quote



Well, Zakk, I am concerned with following Christ, but I will never force you to follow Him. As for the polyester thing, I said: We have all sinned (worn polyester, as you put it). You. Me. Your grandma. My aunt Lou. All of us. That is why we all need a Savior.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: gamblefish on 08/17/03 at 06:36 a.m.

Con't...

Quoting:
there are many christians i respect, for there are a great many who have begun to think for themselves, and realize that the idea of a god who would people to eternal damnation just because they love their same gender is utterly ridiculous.
End Quote



What you are saying here is that you respect Christians who share your viewpoint. Those who do not share your viewpoint are "ridiculous". That smacks of bigotry.


Quoting:
fishie's comment about the "Gay agenda" being "shoved down people's throats" was very disrespectful.End Quote



No disrespect meant, Zakk. The ACLU, GLBT and the like are on a campaign to force America to accept homosexuality as normal. This you cannot deny. You may believe homosexuality is normal, that is your right. I respect that right. But I reserve the right to think for myself too, and I refuse to accept as right a concept that I believe is wrong. When you insist that I validate your lifestyle, then you are forcing your agenda down my throat.


Quoting:
as i mentioned but you simply ignore, you could decide to become gay tomorrow as easily as i could decide to become straight.End Quote



I believe that some people can genuinely be attracted to members of their own sex. That does not mean that such an attraction is a good thing. When I was younger, I was attracted to drugs. Boy, did I like 'em!! Did 'em all the time. Paaaaaaaaaaaaaaarty!!!! WooHoo!! What a mistake. I can see in hindsight that my life would be much better now had I never indulged my desire to get high. Truth is, our wanton desires always get us into trouble. How do we know when a desire is bad? There has got to be a standard. Something to tell us what is good and what is unprofitable. Who should come up with such a standard? Me? You? How about God, who knows all things and only wants what is good for us. That is the standard I have chosen. You can choose it or not, that is your decision.

Quoting:our own desire?  nonsense.  every fifteen minutes, a gay teenager commits suicide.  because, when you begin to develop and realize that you can't like the opposite gender, your first concern is FAR from fulfilling a desire for sex with your own gender.  your first concern is "what if my parents don't love me anymore?  what i get killed?  how am i going to go to school every day and walk through the hallways as other students yell "fag" or dyke" at me?  how am i going to survive the constant beatings?  how am i going to survive when my parents kick me onto the streets because they don't want a queer for a son?"  and many of them, unable to face having this forced upon them, take their own lives rather than live in a world of hatred.  the first thing you THINK of is the consequences...  and your inability to avoid them because face it - god made you this way.End Quote



You must first have a desire for your own gender before you "realize" you are gay and will face persecution. If you are a minor under your parents authority, you pretty much have to do what your parents demand. Once you are old enough, you can move out on your own and do what you want. Suicide is never the answer. What does it accomplish? Nothing. It is the coward's way out.

Sorry for the length, I missed a lot when I went to bed last night!!

To sum up, I am against gay union. We live in a democracy. As I understand it  in a democracy, the majority rules (I know, Don Carlos, I may be wrong ;D). If 8 out of 10 people say no to gay union, then no gay unions. The minority live with that decision. If 8 out of 10 say yes to gay unions, then gay unions for everyone. The minority live with that decision.

I said before, Zakk, I believe that in the near future the gay community will be "celebrated" by all of society and gay unions will be everywhere. As for all of us "bigot" Christians who oppose, we will be rounded up into concentration camps to be executed...the last of a dying breed...



Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hoeveel on 08/17/03 at 08:08 a.m.


Quoting:

Junior, I never said they were the same thing. The point I am making here is that acceptance of one thing leads to acceptance of another. We accepted "free love" (read promiscuity) in the 60's and 70's, homosexuality in the 80's and beyond. The next natural step in this progression is the acceptance of pedophilia and the like.

End Quote



Well, logically then we should outlaw heresy - because acceptance of people who just don't follow god's word is eventually going to lead to wide-spread acceptance of child-abuse and bestiality.

We should basically only accept Christianity and Christians - and anything outside that is a threat.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: John_Seminal on 08/17/03 at 10:48 a.m.

Quoting:
every fifteen minutes, a gay teenager commits suicide.  End Quote



Can I ask you how you know that a gay person commits suicide every 15 minuites? If that is the case, I would be willing to rethink my position. If you are correct, that means that 33,792 gays commited suicide last year. I do not believe it. Furthermore, I would like to know what % of suicides are gay versus the general population. If the rates of suicide are the same in the gay community as the rest of the population, then all you have shown us is gays are like everyone else in having mental illness.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hairspray on 08/17/03 at 02:06 p.m.


Quoting:
i apologize.  ;D  i get a bit heated when it comes to this topic.
End Quote



Apology accepted. I understand your frustration. I have friends who are gay and have witnessed some of their struggles. Fortunately, as time goes by, their struggles are less in reference to discrimination. I often say "Gays are nicest people in the world and make the best friends." I truly believe that. I'm not big on religion and the bible, but I refuse to believe in the possibility of a god who would condemn a good person based on their sexual preference, especially when these good people can't help being the way they are.

Gays have come a long way and times are still changing. Equality will come eventually and is positively closer than it ever was. Homosexuality has become, for the most part, socially accepted. For some people, it's just a matter of general acceptance, getting used to the idea. Some people will never accept, but gays must try to understand these people as well and be tolerant for the sake of peace.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Junior on 08/17/03 at 02:18 p.m.


Quoting:


Apology accepted. I understand your frustration. I have friends who are gay and have witnessed some of their struggles. Fortunately, as time goes by, their struggles are less in reference to discrimination. I often say "Gays are nicest people in the world and make the best friends." I truly believe that. I'm not big on religion and the bible, but I refuse to believe in the possibility of a god who would condemn a good person based on their sexual preference, especially when these good people can't help being the way they are.

Gays have come a long way and times are still changing. Equality will come eventually and is positively closer than it ever was. Homosexuality has become, for the most part, socially accepted. For some people, it's just a matter of general acceptance, getting used to the idea. Some people will never accept, but gays must try to understand these people as well and be tolerant for the sake of peace.
End Quote



Wise words from a wise person. ;)

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hairspray on 08/17/03 at 02:20 p.m.

What I would like to know, placing all religion aside, placing the bible aside -

1) What is a good cause for denying gays the right to marry?

2) What are the official reasons for the denial of gay marriages in most states?

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Hairspray on 08/17/03 at 02:21 p.m.

Quoting:
Wise words from a wise person. ;)
End Quote



Thanks man.

Edited to add: Nah, I'm just old. ;D :)

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Don_Carlos on 08/17/03 at 02:42 p.m.


Quoting:


I'm sure they did too . There are still some churches today that frown on any music at all in service, tho I am not sure what denominations. If only they would read their bibles... ::)


That's funny, because I find myself becoming more of a Calvinist these days!!
End Quote



Does that mean that you are coming to accept predestination?

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Don_Carlos on 08/17/03 at 02:52 p.m.


Quoting:


Heterosexuals are often promiscuous too, maybe more so than gays, maybe not. Marriage certainly is not a guarantee against promiscuity, although one might imagine it would curtail it a bit!! ;D

Anyway, as a Christian, it really does not matter what I say about homosexual behavior. What matters is what God says about it. And God is against it, so I must also be against it. I know that many don't believe in the bible as the Word of God, and that's their choice. I guess I just wanted to clarify why I say no to gay marriage/union.
End Quote



Yeah, the bible is pretty clear about homosexuality.  But marriage is sanctioned by the state.  Sure, clergy get to perform marriage cerimonies that are recognized by the state, but so do Justices of the Peace, and in Vermont, even town clerks.  I have no problem with a clergy person refusing to perform a unisex marriage, but I do have a problem with religious people imposing their morality on the rest of us.  Seems to me that the 1st Amendment protects all from the imposition of an imposed religion and therefore, an imposed morality.  As it should be.  The old testament, by the way, makes playing football a sin.  Levidicus forbids touching the skin of a pig.  It also prohibits touching a woman during "that time of the month", but how can you tell?  The point is that much in both the old and the new testaments is just silly in our modern world.

Subject: Re: Gay Rights!

Written By: Don_Carlos on 08/17/03 at 02:58 p.m.


Quoting:

~*~
okay, so maybe i'm biased on the subject, but...

the whole notion of "god" punishing his children to burn in a fiery hell forever all because they loved one gender over the other is...  incomprehensible.  unless "god" is a schizo.

afterall - whoo, he's so loving, he's so wonderful, so fabulous...  but then at same time he's vengeful.  and in a way, cruel and heartless.  after all, doesn't creating something, and then condemning that same creation to eternal damnation because of the way you created it seem a bit sadistic to you?

and do believe me - homosexuality is not a choice.  no one sits down and says to themselves "hmm.  i think i want to be hated for who i am.  i want to live a life of being ostracized and persecuted.  i want to live my life knowing that every night a homophobe could decide to kill me just cause i love in a different way than he does!  that sure sounds swell!"

obviously, i'm pro gay marriage.  and not civil unions...  the government needs to call them the same thing - because we aren't a theocracy.  the bible may say marriage is between a man and a woman, but the government should have no concern with the bible.  that's the point of this whole constitution thing we've got, you know?  therefore, it's the same thing for everyone, or, the government should have no concern with marriages period.

canada looks more appealing each and every day as the backwards loonies of the religious right pull so many strings in our sad excuse for a democracy.
End Quote



VERY WELL SAID

I'm straight, not by choice, it's just how I came out, like everyone else.  Hopefully, the day will come when we will recognize that people don't opt for one form of sexuality over another, and will learn to accept and honor the love that ANY two people share.  Of course I support gay marriage.  And you're right.  Canada IS looking better every day.  But I think I'll stick around here at least until 2004, to vote against junior.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Don_Carlos on 08/17/03 at 03:10 p.m.


Quoting:
All right, I have been long absent because I have been busy, but this is a topic that I can not ignore.
First of all being Gay is truly a choice. Homosexuality is a way of life, not a genetic defect that you are born with and you just cannot help. Also Marriage is a creation of Religion. It is best taken place in a church or religious institution. And as Gamblefish said, God is very much so against Sodomy or Homosexuality. You know God created Adam and Eve, Not Adam and Steve.. :-X
Marriage is usually called a holy union. There just is no denying that marriage is of religion and in America, Generally a Christian marriage. The Bible is against Sodomy.
Also to clarify God hates the sin not the sinner. He loves everybody all the same no matter what you do. However, He has established commandments which are very clear to anyone who has actually read the bible.
Above all on this topic being called Gay rights:
This is an Oxymoron! The only rights they have are inherent rights that everybody else has. Homosexuality is a choice. I could be gay if I wanted but I Like girls and I believe that it is unatural.
If you want a more scientific answer as to why Homosexuality is in and of itself a wrong thing, just think about nature. And your physical body. Men were made to fertilize a Woman's egg. And Woman are made to be fertilzed. To be blunt, Woman are meant to be penetrated and men are meant to petetrate them. Take a health class on Sex 101. A man's organs are not meant to mix with another man's organs.
Sorry, but nature did not make a mistake. Nature makes you a body built for bringing children about, not enjoying your own sex! So anyone who is gay, has told thier brain to reject that which is natural to themselves, in favor for thier same sex. (Thus they HAVE made a choice)
Humans jsut have such powerful minds that we can literally overtake the body. You can condition yourself to be sexually attracted to the same sex. Some sickos out there could probably claim that Buggery is a choice to. (Buggery is having sex with another animal Like a Woman and Horse.)
Now come on folks, The same reasons gays say they are gay could be applied to those who practice Buggery! But, you all probably think Buggery is sick and unnatural! Right! Well so do I, and I think the same about homosexuality. Makes ma wanna vomit and it is just plain unnatural!



End Quote



Both biologists and psychologists would disagree with this rant in its totality, as would anthropologists.

Marriage is certainly a part of all religions, because all religions want to control sexuality, which is clearly a driving force in all creatures.  The needle and dragon flies were breeding like crazy on the lake today.  My daughter's dissertation is on the role of scent, noise, and motion in the mating preferences of fruit flies, so of which, she reports, are gay.  With brains the size of atoms, I doubt that they made a conscious choice.

But this country is a secular state, not a theocracy, christian or other.  So follow your religious beliefs, but keep them out of public policy.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Don_Carlos on 08/17/03 at 03:20 p.m.


Quoting:
don't know how to do the quotes right, but John_Seminal wrote this...

I don't know if you mean 30 as being "a few" but psychologists declassified homosexuality as a mental illness in 1973.  Thirty years ago.  And with the field of psychology being a relatively new science, of course it's going to be refined, and better understood everyday.  And they realized they were wrong about calling it a mental illness thirty years ago.  And, there is no evidence about it being a choice, either.  Once again, I'd like to draw the parellel with African-Americans.  It was decided they weren't slaves over a hundred years ago.  However, people still didn't  believe they were equal human beings...  so rather than lying low and just "going to live", they protested, they rallied, they wanted to be thought of as humans, not sub-class creatures "allowed" to exist.  And homosexuality is the same way.  And, I'm sorry to tell you this, but "everyone" doesn't think it's disgusting.  You're the minority in your small-mindedness now.  My generation more than ever refuses to live in a world full of bigotry, conformity and control by forces such as the Church.  My generation wants to live, it wants to experience life, and it wants to throw off the chains...  all the hundreds of young gays, goths, freaks, punks feminists, ravers, vegans, and the dozens of other groups who are tired of the close-minded status quo are going to be adults, and the elderly bigots are going to start dropping like flies...  there'll be some to replace them of course, but the fact is, we're winning.  ;D  
End Quote



Winning?  Attitudes may be changing, that's true, but yoiu can't start winning until you begin to br politically active.  Truth is, that of all demographic groups, those between 18 and 30 have the lowest voter turnout of any age group.  You want to make change?  you have older allies - myself included - but you've got to get involved, and you've got to VOTE.

Subject: Re: Gay rights

Written By: Don_Carlos on 08/17/03 at 03:35 p.m.


Quoting:


i apologize.  ;D  i get a bit heated when it comes to this topic.<