In a gay relationship someone is wearing the purse, so someone should be in the kitchen. :3
rude. no i'm just kidding man. i haven't read all of the posts in this thread, but i'll just drop by to leave my own argument.Sync wrote:
I personally do not know a single person that does not "believe" in gay rights. Then again, most of the people I "personally know" are on the internet these days...but outside of 13 year olds and uber-religious people it probably remains the same
silmarilen wrote:
anybody who even thinks of gay people being "different" should get special treatment, they arent any more different than you or me.
Tell me where this is so I can live there.Miracle Lotus wrote:
Gay people already have more rights than straight people.
Canada.Hika wrote:
Tell me where this is so I can live there.Miracle Lotus wrote:
Gay people already have more rights than straight people.
My state is considering kicking homosexuals out of school for extra money going toward education. It's one thing to not let them get married, but it's another to let their education be denied based on their sexual orientation. I'd be damned if I got kicked out of school because I like other females. I don't see this as 'more rights' than straight people.
There's no way to prove the dog has consent over the marriage, so there's a reason why you can't marry your dog. Gay couples aren't vegetables and are consenting and willing to mutually get married. Plus, bringing up interspecies marriage is just like saying "HO HO I'M A PASTAFARIAN" (aka. Bringing up extremes to try to prove a point wrong), since I've never been wholly aware that people have been heavily desiring to engage in a fully commited LEGAL relationship with an animal in a huge ceremony plus legal responsibility and stuff (I know there's people who would want to have crazy sex with animals, but it's pointless to make that legal except for jokes.) With homosexual relationships, it's actually legitimate and not pastafarian-esque nonsense.BRBP wrote:
I want to marry my dog.
Can you people support me and my human rights the same way you support gays?
That'd be great, thanks.
Of course, lol.Miracle Lotus wrote:
You do know that marriage is a religious act, right?
Homosexuality is not allowed in any of the main religions as far as I know.
Oh! That's the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. It's something along those lines.Hika wrote:
I had a friend who told me something about the bible regarding homosexuals because I was highly curious.
I think she said that there was a town that someone had to purge if there was no order or something along those lines? That man went down to the town and noticed that men were having sex with men, women were having sex with other women, and things were chaotic, so the man burned the city down with his wife, and God told them not to look back. The woman looked back and she was turned into stone.
That's what I heard, not what I read.
EDIT: nah i think she was turned into sand or something actually
It can be religious or secular; I'm sure you've seen straight couples have weddings outside of churches with no mention of religion. Separation of church and state is a pretty laughable concept when it's all too obvious that religious culture has a huge impact on marriage rights among other things.Miracle Lotus wrote:
You do know that marriage is a religious act, right?
Homosexuality is not allowed in any of the main religions as far as I know.
The story is talking about Lot. Lot, his wife, and I believe his daughters (I'm guessing because I know the story after it regards his daughters) were living in the town of Sodom that was very much not following God, and Lot is asked in Genesis 19:5 to have homosexual relations with the guests, and being angered at Lot's offering of his two virgin daughters instead. There's also stuff about like oral/anal sex, etc. Anyways, God says that he is going to destroy the town for not following his ways, but he will save Lot, since Lot and his family follow God deeply. However, God tells them to not look back when they run. They flee the town and go to the town of Gomorrah, which meets a similar fate and they flee in a similar fashion, but in Gomorrah they flee, Lot's wife looks back. Because she didn't follow God, she was turned into a pillar of salt. The story was meant to show that if one was not obedient to God's commands, they would be met with terrible consequences.Hika wrote:
I had a friend who told me something about the bible regarding homosexuals because I was highly curious.
I think she said that there was a town that someone had to purge if there was no order or something along those lines? That man went down to the town and noticed that men were having sex with men, women were having sex with other women, and things were chaotic, so the man burned the city down with his wife, and God told them not to look back. The woman looked back and she was turned into stone.
That's what I heard, not what I read.
EDIT: nah i think she was turned into sand or something actually
"'Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable." Leviticus 18:22
"'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." Leviticus 20:13
"Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men" 1 Corintians 6:9
"In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error." Romans 1:27So pretty much, it's an issue of Church and State. Homosexual activity, in a legal sense, has literally no economic downfall to society, and does not injure it directly. Unlike issues very similar to this (ie. Women's rights, Black rights, Immigration laws), the issue at hand won't really affect the workforce, it'll just make people allowed to have a cute little ceremony and get legal benefits such as Social Security.
I think it's lost its impact as a religious act. Mostly because plenty of atheists get married without any hinderance. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying that the definition of what marriage has changed over time.Miracle Lotus wrote:
You do know that marriage is a religious act, right?
Homosexuality is not allowed in any of the main religions as far as I know.
I pretty much agree with this, nothing else needs to be said.Lily-Kun wrote:
I think everyone can do whatever they want, provided that it doesn't harm anyone or anything.
GladiOol wrote:
12 reasons gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry
7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.lold
Is there any reason in particular you find it gross? Aside from religious arguments, that's the second thing I hear (mind you, it's never said about lesbians). The only answers I've heard are basically "dunno" or "it's not right/natural".Ephemeral wrote:
nobody whom is healthy of mind, religious or otherwise, will have any conscientious objection to gay rights.
i'll be frank - i find it pretty gross, but that doesn't mean i hold any overt feeling towards people who don't deliberately shove the stuff in my face. denying them otherwise standard human rights is an absolute atrocity.
Gay people: LITERALLY ANIMALSBRBP wrote:
Do I really have to bring up the dog discussion again or will you stop asking stupid questions?Jarby wrote:
Is there any reason in particular you find it gross?
it's completely irrelevant wether you find it gross or not. i think it's gross as well, but hey, whatever floats your boat.Apex wrote:
I found gay sex disgusting and disturbing until I found out my lover liked yaoi material.
Then, I was confused to be one or not.
TamaraMarie wrote:
This is why I definitely feel trapped being a member of the Roman Catholic religion where I'm one of very few who actually think this way. ;___;
My Mum is Catholic and she supports gay marriage.TamaraMarie wrote:
tl;dr: I'm Catholic and I believe homosexuals should get married and adopt babies.
@BRBP.CDFA wrote:
There's no way to prove the dog has consent over the marriage, so there's a reason why you can't marry your dog. Gay couples aren't vegetables and are consenting and willing to mutually get married. Plus, bringing up interspecies marriage is just like saying "HO HO I'M A PASTAFARIAN" (aka. Bringing up extremes to try to prove a point wrong), since I've never been wholly aware that people have been heavily desiring to engage in a fully commited LEGAL relationship with an animal in a huge ceremony plus legal responsibility and stuff (I know there's people who would want to have crazy sex with animals, but it's pointless to make that legal except for jokes.) With homosexual relationships, it's actually legitimate and not pastafarian-esque nonsense.BRBP wrote:
I want to marry my dog.
Can you people support me and my human rights the same way you support gays?
That'd be great, thanks.
umLiiraye wrote:
Marriage id NOT a religeous act. Why don't you read up on things you're about to claim, Lotus?
no thats a wedding, which is just for show. the realy thing is just a piece of paper you put your signature on.(at least in the netherlands)CDFA wrote:
umLiiraye wrote:
Marriage id NOT a religeous act. Why don't you read up on things you're about to claim, Lotus?
Marriage is actually pretty religious, or at least the way it's done in America (Which I'm assuming is the context of this discussion). It's done in a religious house of workship done by a priest, many of the lines being read from the bible (1 Corinthians, I believe. I'm not entirely sure, but I know I did a seminar about it and it was in one of Paul's letter to the church that I'm pretty sure is Corinth.) It's not a religious act like taking communion or getting baptized, but it's heavily influence by religion. It's grown now away from religion, as people can be trained to perform ceremonies without being priests, it doesn't have to be done in a chapel, etc.
And I'm not even very studious on the marriage institution, so there's probably more that I'm not aware of (I teach 4th grade at church, not many of them care about the religious aspect of marriage, lol :3) that Lotus would be.
So don't be like "OMG WELL UR DUM" (Which I know it isn't what you said, but the tone of your statement pretty much read it as such) without making sure that you're write too :3.
Nyan.
Jup, you can get married without believing in god and this whole glory church wedding stuff in Germany too.silmarilen wrote:
no thats a wedding, which is just for show. the realy thing is just a piece of paper you put your signature on.(at least in the netherlands)
CDFA wrote:
umLiiraye wrote:
Marriage id NOT a religeous act. Why don't you read up on things you're about to claim, Lotus?
Marriage is actually pretty religious, or at least the way it's done in America (Which I'm assuming is the context of this discussion). It's done in a religious house of workship done by a priest, many of the lines being read from the bible (1 Corinthians, I believe. I'm not entirely sure, but I know I did a seminar about it and it was in one of Paul's letter to the church that I'm pretty sure is Corinth.) It's not a religious act like taking communion or getting baptized, but it's heavily influence by religion. It's grown now away from religion, as people can be trained to perform ceremonies without being priests, it doesn't have to be done in a chapel, etc.
And I'm not even very studious on the marriage institution, so there's probably more that I'm not aware of (I teach 4th grade at church, not many of them care about the religious aspect of marriage, lol :3) that Lotus would be.
So don't be like "OMG WELL UR DUM" (Which I know it isn't what you said, but the tone of your statement pretty much read it as such) without making sure that you're write too :3.
Nyan.