It appears that fundys aren't the only ones who don't like to hear dissent

[Bob M]

Cheesy Burrito Supreme is all I have to say.

[Naomi]

(05-31-2012 02:34 PM)Bob M Wrote:  Cheesy Burrito Supreme is all I have to say.

We may have to start making restaurant runs here... Anyone want to come along to help me pick up all this food?

[elfdream]

(05-31-2012 02:33 PM)DaisyDeadhead Wrote:  

(05-29-2012 11:57 AM)Mominator Wrote:  Good grief. I've only been here month, and I'm called a bigot when I've called no one a name. I just state my opinion and try to support what I believe with facts.

When you say you deserve rights that others do not, you are a bigot. Period. You can give "reasons" until the cows come home, but these are your personal religious reasons that should not apply to a secular govt that believes in the separation of church and state. As a nonChristian, your Christian rules do not govern me, the laws of US govt are the rules that govern me. Forcing your definition of humanity and human rights on the rest of the country, is what we are arguing about.

To hold the position you hold, you unavoidably must believe you are superior to gay people and have the right to control their lives legally, regardless of what they say they prefer for themselves. You know best for them, they don't. You treat them as children who do not know what is best for their lives. THAT is bigotry. You have decided you don't want them to have the rights to insurance, inheritance, adoption, foster care, tax deductions and the right not to have to testify against a partner (and the countless other rights of marriage). You expect to have these rights for yourself, but you will not extend them to other people. There is no reason for this except bigotry. Just because this bigotry is countenanced and encouraged by your religion, does not mean it is not still bigotry. ALL bigotry has been encouraged by some religion at some point in history, and religion has been used to bolster it... so? That does not make it any better or more moral. (We might argue it makes the bigotry more reprehensible and effective, in fact.)

I do not approve of your religion and your lifestyle. However, I do not think I should have the right to legally prohibit it and (example) force you to send your children to public school, even if I think they should go there. Likewise, your approval (or not) of a lifestyle is not the point. The point is extending equal rights to everyone. I support your right to homeschool, even if I think homeschooling sucks. That is democratic. They are your kids, not mine.

Perhaps some day, you will stop being anti-American and support the equal rights of everyone.

This has always been my 'problem'. I have no problem supporting my Church's stance on marriage being a sacrament between a man and a woman. However I don't know why I should force Fred or Hildegarde over here who are NOT members of my church to live by my values and belief system. No one has ever given me a convincing reason as to why I should do so.

[Bob M]

(05-31-2012 02:39 PM)Naomi Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 02:34 PM)Bob M Wrote:  Cheesy Burrito Supreme is all I have to say.

We may have to start making restaurant runs here... Anyone want to come along to help me pick up all this food?

I'd be glad to. We can even get some cottage cheese as a side.

[Bob M]

(05-31-2012 02:43 PM)elfdream Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 02:33 PM)DaisyDeadhead Wrote:  When you say you deserve rights that others do not, you are a bigot. Period. You can give "reasons" until the cows come home, but these are your personal religious reasons that should not apply to a secular govt that believes in the separation of church and state. As a nonChristian, your Christian rules do not govern me, the laws of US govt are the rules that govern me. Forcing your definition of humanity and human rights on the rest of the country, is what we are arguing about.

To hold the position you hold, you unavoidably must believe you are superior to gay people and have the right to control their lives legally, regardless of what they say they prefer for themselves. You know best for them, they don't. You treat them as children who do not know what is best for their lives. THAT is bigotry. You have decided you don't want them to have the rights to insurance, inheritance, adoption, foster care, tax deductions and the right not to have to testify against a partner (and the countless other rights of marriage). You expect to have these rights for yourself, but you will not extend them to other people. There is no reason for this except bigotry. Just because this bigotry is countenanced and encouraged by your religion, does not mean it is not still bigotry. ALL bigotry has been encouraged by some religion at some point in history, and religion has been used to bolster it... so? That does not make it any better or more moral. (We might argue it makes the bigotry more reprehensible and effective, in fact.)

I do not approve of your religion and your lifestyle. However, I do not think I should have the right to legally prohibit it and (example) force you to send your children to public school, even if I think they should go there. Likewise, your approval (or not) of a lifestyle is not the point. The point is extending equal rights to everyone. I support your right to homeschool, even if I think homeschooling sucks. That is democratic. They are your kids, not mine.

Perhaps some day, you will stop being anti-American and support the equal rights of everyone.

This has always been my 'problem'. I have no problem supporting my Church's stance on marriage being a sacrament between a man and a woman. However I don't know why I should force Fred or Hildegarde over here who are NOT members of my church to live by my values and belief system. No one has ever given me a convincing reason as to why I should do so.

I struggled with that too, but I read this about William Wilberforce who gave his life to outlaw the slave trade in Great Britain and I think he did the right thing.

William Wilberforce

[DaisyDeadhead]

(05-30-2012 11:06 PM)myotch Wrote:  I am no homophobe. I am no bigot. I am extremely tolerant. I am not prejudiced.

Then pronouncing on what other people should or should not be allowed to legally engage in, is something you would never, ever do. Right?

Otherwise, yes, you are.

(05-30-2012 11:06 PM)myotch Wrote:  But I also hold to the view that marriage is necessarily between a man and a woman.

And in your church, the Catholic church, that is the way it will stay. They will not force gay marriage on churches. We are talking about secular laws. Why do you care what people do in other churches or in secular courts?

Divorce is much more common than gay marriage, are you in favor of outlawing that too? Why or why not?

(05-30-2012 11:06 PM)myotch Wrote:  There is no historical context we can point to in the entirety of human civilization to place homosexual marriage as some right which societies must recognize.

Over many languages and cultures spanning the world, we can find absolutely no inclusion for homosexuals in any etymological root of the various words for marriage.

Wrong, John Boswell already dealt with this in his book: Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe
http://www.amazon.com/Same-Sex-Unions-Pr...0679751645

Several Native American tribes historically also allowed same sex unions, as did some African tribes and Hindu castes.

(05-30-2012 11:06 PM)myotch Wrote:  I find the political redefinition of words Orwellian and distasteful. As well, I find the trivialization of the institution of marriage to be Huxley-an and equally distasteful.

Trivialization? People FIGHTING FOR THE RIGHT TO MARRY is trivializing? How so? They WANT to be married and their fight is a testimony to how IMPORTANT AND CRUCIAL they believe it is! How is this trivializing????

(05-30-2012 11:06 PM)myotch Wrote:  This is a totally different issue than merely "what the Bible says".

No, that is exactly what it is... ask Greg, he'll tell you.

NonChristians should not have to adhere to your Christian laws in a SECULAR NATION, and for you to continually force them on others is anti-American, bigoted and fascist.

Hope that is PC enough for you. Tired of all these other sweet, well-behaved, nice folks being called liberals, when genuine leftist fulminating is MY job around here.

[elfdream]

(05-31-2012 02:53 PM)Bob M Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 02:43 PM)elfdream Wrote:  This has always been my 'problem'. I have no problem supporting my Church's stance on marriage being a sacrament between a man and a woman. However I don't know why I should force Fred or Hildegarde over here who are NOT members of my church to live by my values and belief system. No one has ever given me a convincing reason as to why I should do so.

I struggled with that too, but I read this about William Wilberforce who gave his life to outlaw the slave trade in Great Britain and I think he did the right thing.

William Wilberforce

Except that Christianity is the established official religion of England. Its not here.

I'm also not one of the 'America is a Christan Nation' crowd. I understand why some might see it that way. I just don't.

[DaisyDeadhead]

(05-31-2012 01:21 PM)greg Wrote:  Someone who "accepts" perversion.............is also perverted

You say that like its a bad thing!

Greg, here it is: perverts have rights too. I know, you don't think they/we should have them, but we do have them, and we will fight for them.

Get used to it. Not going away.

[DaisyDeadhead]

(05-31-2012 02:53 PM)Bob M Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 02:43 PM)elfdream Wrote:  This has always been my 'problem'. I have no problem supporting my Church's stance on marriage being a sacrament between a man and a woman. However I don't know why I should force Fred or Hildegarde over here who are NOT members of my church to live by my values and belief system. No one has ever given me a convincing reason as to why I should do so.

I struggled with that too, but I read this about William Wilberforce who gave his life to outlaw the slave trade in Great Britain and I think he did the right thing.

William Wilberforce

Okay, I'll play.

What does outlawing the slave trade have to do with outlawing gay marriage? Are ... you... COMPARING... the two?

Oh dear. It's pretty bad in here, isn't it?

[Qrayze]

(05-31-2012 01:25 AM)myotch Wrote:  How did your parents take it when you told them you were female?

I can't quite figure out if you're being facetious or serious with this question.