California prop 8:

#151
#151
wbailey7 said:
I'm not trying to be a smart-ass, but you should read a little more into the writings of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.
Click to expand...

Why does it say "In God we trust" in the Capital Building where Congress meets?

Why do they pray before every meeting?

Why do we swear in presidents using the Bible?
 
#154
#154
JZVOL said:
Why does it say "In God we trust" in the Capital Building where Congress meets?

Why do they pray before every meeting?

Why do we swear in presidents using the Bible?
Click to expand...

People who interject it into government, that's why. His statement was a partial distortion of history, and I was simply offering some advice. Jefferson and Madison were some very interesting individuals.

Just for the record, I believe in god....I'm just not a big fan of having it involved in our government. I also have black friends.
 
#155
#155
wbailey7 said:
People who interject it into government, that's why. His statement was a partial distortion of history, and I was simply offering some advice. Jefferson and Madison were some very interesting individuals.

Just for the record, I believe in god....I'm just not a big fan of having it involved in our government. I also have black friends.
Click to expand...

No doubt they were, but the separation of God from government just isn't accurate.

Congress prays to God before every meeting for guidance in a place the is inscribed with "in God we trust."

The president places his hand on the Bible.
 
#157
#157
JZVOL said:
Question: Does anyone disagree that homosexuality goes against the laws of nature?
Click to expand...

No more than intelligent design goes against the laws of nature. So I guess it depends on how you define it.

Not that I really wanted to go down this road: but what about all the young heterosexual guys that creep around back on their girlfriends/wives? Does this mean they are violating nature? Can't get married? Are disgusting and immoral?

Is this really a gay issue or a sodomy issue? If it's a sodomy issue then this changes things dramatically.
 
#158
#158
JZVOL said:
No doubt they were, but the separation of God from government just isn't accurate.

Congress prays to God before every meeting for guidance in a place the is inscribed with "in God we trust."

The president places his hand on the Bible.
Click to expand...

You're misinterpreting what I said/implied. Without a doubt, we don't have full separation of god from government. Should we? Well, that depends on who you ask.

There seems to be a movement of supressing Christianity (it's coming from the left) because of political correctness and what have you, which is garbage.

I think sometimes people assume that when one supports gays being able to enter into a state recognized institution (doesn't matter what you wanna call it), it's a shot at Christianity; it's not (at least from me).

My reason is for taxes, to be honest. Assets a partner loses in death and estate taxes after their significant other dies.
 
#160
#160
VolByBirth said:
No more than intelligent design goes against the laws of nature. So I guess it depends on how you define it.

Not that I really wanted to go down this road: but what about all the young heterosexual guys that creep around back on their girlfriends/wives? Does this mean they are violating nature? Can't get married? Are disgusting and immoral?

Is this really a gay issue or a sodomy issue? If it's a sodomy issue then this changes things dramatically.
Click to expand...

Not sure what all of that has to do with anything really.
 
#161
#161
wbailey7 said:
You're misinterpreting what I said/implied. Without a doubt, we don't have full separation of god from government. Should we? Well, that depends on who you ask.

There seems to be a movement of supressing Christianity (it's coming from the left) because of political correctness and what have you, which is garbage.

I think sometimes people assume that when one supports gays being able to enter into a state recognized institution (doesn't matter what you wanna call it), it's a shot at Christianity; it's not (at least from me).

My reason is for taxes, to be honest. Assets a partner loses in death and estate taxes after their significant other dies.
Click to expand...

Well said and I agree with the last paragraph as well, yet I've somehow been called a bigot and intolerant by 666.
 
#163
#163
What percentage of gay activists are doing this for marriage rights as opposed to those who want to insult religion?
 
#164
#164
KB5252 said:
What percentage of gay activists are doing this for marriage rights as opposed to those who want to insult religion?
Click to expand...

after Nov. 4th, it became purely an attack on religion when the anti-prop 8 mobs focused their attention on Rick Warren and the Mormons but conveniently ignored their social allies the African Americans, hispanics, and Muslims without whose support prop 8 would have failed.
 
#165
#165
KB5252 said:
What percentage of gay activists are doing this for marriage rights as opposed to those who want to insult religion?
Click to expand...

Great question, and I'd be willing to say that most Christians feel it is an attack on them.
 
#166
#166
Not to mention the concerted effort to cause disruption at church services and make a mockery of religious customs.

Bottom line here is that those who hate religion and what it stands for are entrenched in this agenda. I believe that most gay couples would be satisfied with the rights afforded by marriage through a civil union. The problem is that those who want to insult and make a mockery out of religion want to push forward with marriage rights.
 
#167
#167
MG1968 said:
after Nov. 4th, it became purely an attack on religion when the anti-prop 8 mobs focused their attention on Rick Warren and the Mormons but conveniently ignored their social allies the African Americans, hispanics, and Muslims without whose support prop 8 would have failed.
Click to expand...

You hit the nail directly on the head. Honestly, do they think they're going to further their cause by attacking a person's faith and culture? The best thing they could do is to try their best to educate EVERYONE as to what they're trying to accomplish.

I just can't see a vast majority of people on either side being in support of the tax thing I mentioned before. I mean, assets to the govt, or to the person that proceeded in building a life with another person that is now deceased. I would imagine with a little time and education with these "quirks" in the system, they will get what they are looking for.
 
Last edited:
#168
#168
No doubt, then churches that refuse to allow them to be married in their church will be called intolerant and bigots, like I have been called in this thread.
 
#169
#169
If there are churches that choose to marry gay couples then so be it. The responsibility is on them and their congregations. If gay marriage is allowed then churches will be left open to lawsuits. Even if they are thrown out they will be forced to use resources to fight these lawsuits. Resources better spent on community service and outreach projects.
 
#170
#170
therealUT said:
If initial non-institutional counseling did not work, yes.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

so from that statement, can I conclude that you believe it possible to learn how to "not be gay," something akin to, say, quitting smoking?

And if you agree with the above statement, I would like to hear your rationale.
 
#171
#171
DowntownVol said:
so from that statement, can I conclude that you believe it possible to learn how to "not be gay," something akin to, say, quitting smoking?

And if you agree with the above statement, I would like to hear your rationale.
Click to expand...
In my opinion, homosexuality is a mental disorder in which one can possibly be cured, if treated early enough. This is not much different from other mental disorders which are caught early on. Learning has little to nothing to do with it.

As for academics and cases for qualifying homosexual acts as normal, I would like to provide the following: the most comprehensive experimentation on sexuality still belong to the Kinsey Institute at IU. If you would like to take anything stated by that institute as "normal" at face value, be my guest.

Kinsey might just be the most perverse and deranged "academic" in the modern era. The fact that those who wish to state that certain consensual sexual acts are healthy and use an institute named in honor of a far from sexually healthy individual is interesting, at best.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#172
#172
Daddy Gee said:
Not a theocracy, but we were founded by Christian men who believed that they must have God and His Word in order to govern. We have been straying from that, especially for the last 60 years.
Click to expand...

Fortunately.

Outside of serving as a loose guideline for lawmaking, religion (read: any religion) has no place within government.
 
Last edited:
#173
#173
therealUT said:
In my opinion, homosexuality is a mental disorder in which one can possibly be cured, if treated early enough. This is not much different from other mental disorders which are caught early on. Learning has little to nothing to do with it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

What are you basing this on? I'm not picking a fight here, I am just under a different opinion. I do agree, however, that it is not a socially learned condition.

Some people are just born that way, and it can't be "cured". No amount of therapy, short of castration, can "cure" child molestors. There is a reason it has the highest recidivism rate of any crime. People are just born with their brain working in different ways. This is why child molesters should just be locked away. If homosexuals aren't hurting anybody else and acting in a consenting fashion, it shouldn't be viewed as a disorder to be cured.
 
#174
#174
therealUT said:
In my opinion, homosexuality is a mental disorder in which one can possibly be cured, if treated early enough. This is not much different from other mental disorders which are caught early on. Learning has little to nothing to do with it.

As for academics and cases for qualifying homosexual acts as normal, I would like to provide the following: the most comprehensive experimentation on sexuality still belong to the Kinsey Institute at IU. If you would like to take anything stated by that institute as "normal" at face value, be my guest.

Kinsey might just be the most perverse and deranged "academic" in the modern era. The fact that those who wish to state that certain consensual sexual acts are healthy and use an institute named in honor of a far from sexually healthy individual is interesting, at best.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Couldn't possibly disagree with you more, but fair enough.
 
#175
#175
to date no gay gene has been found. so until the day the gene is discovered the gay rights movement is asking for special rights not equal rights. i believe there are many things that lead a person to being attracted to someone of the same sex but one is not born that way. being gay is not the same as being a women or being black or any other minority so the civil rights argument is mute. the people using religion to argue against gay marriage do more harm to their cause than good in my opinion. the arguemnet should be based on logic, leave religion and how you "feel" about the subject behind. you cant "convert" people to your point of view when using your gut feeling or religion as your basis of debate. this coming from a deist conservative by the way. lol
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top