_Vols in NC...get out and vote!!! Need your help. MAY 8

#327
#327
orangeslice13 said:
That was a friendly stab at thrasher. But it does bring us back to the question of authority and on who's authority we base these decisions.
Click to expand...

We do not have to base the decisions on any person's authority; we can base the decisions on the notions of free will and reason, and the respect we have for those notions.
 
#328
#328
orangeslice13 said:
So if the government is out of the marriage business is 2 men and one woman ok? Or the other way arround? Should we do away with the age of consent? And how young is to young? How many is to many in the group marriage?

And finally by what authority do we base our decisions?
Click to expand...

Trut, you answered the authority question. What about the rest?
 
#331
#331
marcusluvsvols said:
If you bothered to read the entire thread, which its clear you didn't, you would have seen I have been deliberate about not judging anyone or trying to interfere with what they do in their own bedrooms. I've made it clear that their personal lives are none of my business and I honestly couldn't care less.
Marriage, however, is a different story altogether. It is not an institution created by man and we have no right to change the requirements thereof. God said marriage is a covenant between 1man, 1 woman and Himself. I simply attempted to make voters in NC aware of the upcoming vote and bring this issue to light. I have succeeded in doing that.
Click to expand...

When my wife and I wrote our vows we went out of our way to not have the word "God" said at any point in the ceremony. We did have a moment of silence at the end to appease family that wanted a prayer.

Should we be denied the rights of marriage because we left God out?
 
#332
#332
burntorangeVOLffle said:
When my wide and I wrote our vows we went out of our way to not have the word "God" said at any point in the ceremony. We did have a moment of silence at the end to appease family that wanted a prayer.

Should we be denied the rights of marriage because we left God out?
Click to expand...

Was wide instead of wife a slip?
 
#333
#333
therealUT said:
Yes.



Yes.



Well, if you are grounding your ideas of marriage in the Bible, then it would only be consistent to do away with the age of consent (Mary was what, 13, 14 years old; Joseph was in his 70s?)



The authorities of FREE-WILL and REASON!
Click to expand...

Found it. I missed it the first time.
 
#335
#335
trut, great to have you back posting. I love the way you make everyone, including me, examine why we believe what we believe. Even when I don't necessarily agree with your position, I respect it because I know you have given due diligence in arriving at that position. Truly a pleasure, my friend.
 
#337
#337
JayVols said:
trut, great to have you back posting. I love the way you make everyone, including me, examine why we believe what we believe. Even when I don't necessarily agree with your position, I respect it because I know you have given due diligence in arriving at that position. Truly a pleasure, my friend.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Hope you are still doing well. After completing two of my papers, I decided to treat myself by hopping on here this weekend. I will probably be pretty sparse for the next three weeks, though.
 
#340
#340
therealUT said:
Thanks. Hope you are still doing well. After completing two of my papers, I decided to treat myself by hopping on here this weekend. I will probably be pretty sparse for the next three weeks, though.
Click to expand...

Get finished and get back. I am feeling better than I have at any point since my 2004 diagnosis. I actually feel almost like I did before I started having problems. Thanks for asking.
 
#341
#341
Chris4Vols22 said:
Ok, fair enough. I obviously didn't read the whole thread, but I see what you're saying now. The issue is that you're trying to force a religious criteria for a government issue. It's not your fault or anything, it's the way the system is set up and interpreted.

So my real question is why not allow LGBTs to have equal rights because of a religious barrier in a government issue? Why are you saying the government should make this official policy? What are they gaining from making it a religious issue as opposed to letting them have a marriage on their own accord? Seriously, what are you or anyone gaining by trying to pass this bill?
Click to expand...

Would like to hear some opinions :hi:
 
#342
#342
Thrasher865 said:
Also, can I marry my dog? Because that would be so much less trouble. Then I could probably take a life insurance policy out on him if I managed to get him a job. I could collect that puppy (no pun intended) in another 5-10 years and be set for a while.
Click to expand...

pretty sure you lose the argument when you start comparing homosexuals to dogs
 
#344
#344
Thrasher865 said:
Why? It's been done in other countries. Hell, I'm pretty sure I remember a story about some chick marrying herself.
Click to expand...

pretty insulting wouldn't you say? It also has nothing to do with a discussion about consenting adults being able to marry
 
#345
#345
utvolpj said:
pretty insulting wouldn't you say? It also has nothing to do with a discussion about consenting adults being able to marry
Click to expand...

One of the least offensive things I've read in the politics forum, I'd say. My point was that if you are going to widen the legal definition of marriage from what is considered a natural, monogomous relationship (man & woman), even completely disregarding the religious viewpoint, then where do you stop broadening the relationship.

You're right, though. I may have taken it too far by unintentionally comparing a gay relationship to a relationship with a dog. That wasn't fair to the dogs.

:)

Okay, now I'm just being rude. I love gay people. Don't take that out of context. I just spend too much time in the endzone and forget to convert back to my serious face when I come in here.

Anyway, you're right. I can see the clear distinction between two same-sex adults having a relationship. FTR, I am all for gay marriage. I was just pursuing slice's argument.
 
#346
#346
I'm hopped up on too much caffeine, so I'm probably speaking nonsense.

And I meant definition*, not relationship, in the final word of my first paragraph.
 
#347
#347
Reading through the first few pages of this thread has given me a new appreciation for VN. I wasn't expecting these reactions, given that this is a forum with a mostly Southern population.

:good!:
 
#348
#348
Stupified said:
Reading through the first few pages of this thread has given me a new appreciation for VN. I wasn't expecting these reactions, given that this is a forum with a mostly Southern population.

:good!:
Click to expand...


Only 64.2% of us are backwoods southern social conservative redneck hicks.
 
Last edited:
#350
#350
Chris4Vols22 said:
Ok, fair enough. I obviously didn't read the whole thread, but I see what you're saying now. The issue is that you're trying to force a religious criteria for a government issue. It's not your fault or anything, it's the way the system is set up and interpreted.

So my real question is why not allow LGBTs to have equal rights because of a religious barrier in a government issue? Why are you saying the government should make this official policy? What are they gaining from making it a religious issue as opposed to letting them have a marriage on their own accord? Seriously, what are you or anyone gaining by trying to pass this bill?
Click to expand...

So no one has answered, so we all agree that that the best thing this law could possibly do is deny equal rights to the LGBTS community. Pretty easy to decide that this proposal is whack. :good!:
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top