California courts SUCK!!!! **IF YOU ARE HOMOPHOBIC..DO NOT ENTER **

[Azriel_LittleHawk]

why does it matter so damned much what the sex is of the person who holds your heart? this is total CRAP!!

people not mindin their own damn business!!

yep..the "courts" *sneer noted* decided that the same sex marriages are illegal!!

great.. hmm...not realy all that surprising considering who is polishing the big seat at the white house.. :rolleyes:

lemme tell ya i have to much going on in my life to pay atention or give a fuzzy rodents posterior what or who others are doing behind closed doors. long as they are decent sorts, law abiding citizens..it's none my business..straight an to the point.

pompous arrogance ....that some yahoo ...can decide this..ok..GROUP of yahoo's can dictate what truly should be a common sense no nonsense thing.

GAHHH!!!

sometimes i wonder *worry* bout this country!!

anyway take care folks.. i have to go before my mouth gets me into anymore trouble...*LOL*
ciao!
Az

[Denise1972]

ITA. The people that did get married in CA, should be allowed to stay married. I dont care either what they do in their own bedroom.. That is their business. This is SUPPOSED to be a free country... They should be able to get married. I think it is rotten to grant that right, and then take it away, because people think it is immoral.

If a person says they are gay, some people automatically link it to they have sex with a partner of the same sex.. They should be thought of an everday person. They should have every right heterosexuals do.

My ex Boyfriends mother is a Lesbian, and so is his oldest sister. They live in Florida, and they cant live their lives together, because someone says NO? Arent these people grown adults, that can do with their life as they please? They are not hurting anyone. I believe if a man and a man or a woman and a woman want to marry, WHO are the courts to tell them they cant? I think it is totally wrong.

[msmom79]

i dont agree with same sex marriage,but im not going to condem people who have them!! as long as they dont try to push it off on me or my family,i dont care what they do. jmo

[pae1968]

I agree that it shouldn't matter. California had no problems taking their money to get married. Are they gonna reimburse them for the marriage license?? Probably not.

[MamaFairal]

*Go Azriel~ Go Azriel*

I agree sista ;)

Who cares who ya love as long as ya find love right?
The NJ dude..so what he's gay...oh no! Now he suddenly cant do his job he was elected for? ......yes he can!

Hey doesnt this all mean Rosie O'Donnell's marriage is annulled now too.she was married in S.F right?

Man people need to just mind their own and get over this whole "gay" thing and grow up!

[gonnascream]

george carlin said it best : I don't care what people do. if they want to go hump waterbuffalo, so what ? as long as they aren't hurting anybody, what does it matter to you ? they can love anyway they want, as long as they don't get some of thier lovin' on my leg, I don't care.

[MelanieAnn]

I agree 100%!

[Elijah'sMommy]

Couldn't agree more. I hate the whole "ruining the sanctity of marriage" crap. Marriage is the one time the lines blur for the separation of "church & state" so to speak. Does our government really have nothing better to worry about in our world that who marrys who?

[suziebee20]

I agree. I really think that those who want to "protect the sanctity of marriage" should focus more on the people out there who are getting married and divorced every 5 days.

[Linus1223]

AMEN, honey!

[catssass]

I agree that gay people have the right to "marry" but I think the problem lies in the wording..I feel that most people believe "marriage" should be for a man and a woman and that "civil union" should be for same sex persons, both should have the same rights. I personally don't care either way but I feel the "label" is what is disturbing the majority of "straight" people, especially the older generation...

[buttrfli]

Couldn't have said it better myself! :)

[momfromTN]

The only thing I take exception with in this thread is people who don't agree with gay marriage being labled "homophobic". That is a big misconception. I am NOT afraid of homosexual people. My uncle is one. I don't agree with gay marriage, but if it happens to become legal then that will be the law. I also don't agree with abortion but it IS legal. I don't go out of my way to be nasty to gay people. I treat all people as kindly as I can. If it becomes legal for them to marry, then whatever. As long as I treat people decently, no matter what, then that is what matters.

"Phobic" means to fear or be afraid. Not agreeing with someone's lifestyle is NOT being afraid. There are those who don't agree with Christianity. Are they "Christian-phobic"? Think about it.

[Njean31]

The only thing I take exception with in this thread is people who don't agree with gay marriage being labled "homophobic". That is a big misconception. I am NOT afraid of homosexual people. My uncle is one. I don't agree with gay marriage, but if it happens to become legal then that will be the law. I also don't agree with abortion but it IS legal. I don't go out of my way to be nasty to gay people. I treat all people as kindly as I can. If it becomes legal for them to marry, then whatever. As long as I treat people decently, no matter what, then that is what matters.

"Phobic" means to fear or be afraid. Not agreeing with someone's lifestyle is NOT being afraid. There are those who don't agree with Christianity. Are they "Christian-phobic"? Think about it.

i must agree with that......if i run across elton john somewhere i sure ain't going to become fearful of him and say "get back, honkeycat...not another step forward or some your gayness might rub off on me :p joking... while i don't agree with his lifestyle, i SURE agree with his talent :D i really don't know why they choose to put phobic behind homo...it don't make sense to me either. maybe they should've chosen antihomic, or negahomic or something to that effect

[BlueBerriTerri]

I think it's a lot of BS. It's not good enough for people to live their lives the way they want to--NO--you have to live yours their way as well, apparently. Two people of the same sex getting married is not going to stop anyone else from enjoying their freedoms. You can still go to your church and worship, you can teach your kids your values, and you can choose not to associate with anyone you don't want to. Gay marriages don't and won't keep you from doing anything in your life that you want to--EXCEPT--forcing your religious beliefs on someone else.

[ahippiechic]

I think it's a lot of BS. It's not good enough for people to live their lives the way they want to--NO--you have to live yours their way as well, apparently. Two people of the same sex getting married is not going to stop anyone else from enjoying their freedoms. You can still go to your church and worship, you can teach your kids your values, and you can choose not to associate with anyone you don't want to. Gay marriages don't and won't keep you from doing anything in your life that you want to--EXCEPT--forcing your religious beliefs on someone else.

Exactly.

[LitWtch]

[QUOTE=MamaFairal
Who cares who ya love as long as ya find love right?
The NJ dude..so what he's gay...oh no! Now he suddenly cant do his job he was elected for? ......yes he can!
[/QUOTE]

OK, I'm not gonna comment on the same sex marriage, because I realy don't care.
I couldn't let this one little issue past, so bear with me. This man DID NOT resign because he was gay - he resigned because he knew that the doo was gonna hit the fan. This had nothing to do with him being "gay" as he puts it *also note the man is currently married with children* so doesn't that make him bi - sexual? Any how, he is being accused of making poor judgement decisions, and if he is guilty of such, then THAT makes him unable to fulfill his position in the proper manner. Seems more like he is USING his laspe of better judgement as an excuse so that his inability to handle the position properly can be justified. Now that is just plain wrong...

Please try to see what I am saying not as an insult or flame in any way. This man is trying to excuse his behavior and lack of judgement (affair wise, doesn't matter what sex the person was) by drawing on an issue that is very sensitive in politics at this time. That is wrong.

[stresseater]

Who cares who ya love as long as ya find love right? The NJ dude..so what he's gay...oh no! Now he suddenly cant do his job he was elected for? ......yes he can!
link (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/13/mcgreevey.resigns/index.html)
Actually he's not leaving office because he's gay. He didn't come out for the good of his office either. He came out because his victum was filing a sexual harrassment suit against him.
As for the illegally issued marriage liscences issued in California, they were handed out illegally and therefore they were voided by the court. It would be the same if someone at the DMV started handing out drivers liscenses without abiding by the law while doing it. They would be null and void, right? Believe me the liberal courts in California will decide that NOT issueing them is discriminatory and against their state constitution eventually. It will only take a few months for a case to make it that far. If they were going to maintain ANY sembelance of proprioty they HAD to void the liscenses issued illegally. Otherwise they would be undermining their own integrety and when they got that *magic case* on gay marriage it would be overturned later on.

[schsa]

I agree with catsass that two people of the same sex should be allowed a civil union. This has nothing to do with God or the Bible or christan ethics. This has to do with law and being sure that people who partner for many years are covered by the law if something happens to the union. Marriage is for churches. Civil unions are for judges and other appointed officials.

It has nothing to do with anything but the law. If I were gay and my partner and I had bought a house I would like to think that if something had happened to her that I would inherit or I would be able to keep the house that we had lived in. I would hate to think that her family could come in and take everything that we had bought over the years and push me out the door. That's what this comes down to. Equal rights under the law. It has nothing to do with Christianity or religion. It has to do with law.

[HAPPY1220]

Marriange is between a man and a woman.

[Unicornmom77]

Okay weather or not I believe in gay marriage is irrelavant.... and this may deserve a whole thread of its own... bear with me here, I get excited and tend to ramble lol

Okay where does it say gay marriage is wrong? IN THE BIBLE.. Correct?

And who says government and religion are to be kept seperate?? THE GOVERNMENT... Correct??

So how does the GOVERNMENT have the right to decide what "HOLY MATRIMONY" is?? I mean isnt marriage a vow taken before GOD???

Jmo Not trying to step on any toesies

[Donnagg123]

I agree totally AZ. It is not going to "take away" from my marriage or my belief about marriage if two people marry of the same sex. I feel marriage is about two people who want to be comitted to each other for life. I think most feel that two gays could not commit or it would some how make their marriage mean less because you are allowing something "unnatural" but I think that is just crap! I mean shoot in some states I think up until recently polygamy was legal! To me that is more "unnatural" than two gay people getting married! Okay now to get off my soapbox 'cause I digress too much :)

[farren]

Just because I may not agree with or condone someone's lifestyle does NOT mean I'm afraid of them. I don't agree with gay marriage. I am not afraid of anyone who is gay though. JMO

[bribella]

I don't agree with gay marriages either. But I am also not a homophobe. My brother is gay and I love him the same as I did before we "actually" knew. Thats not to say I agree with it, but it is his life not mine. I think marriage should remain between a man and a woman. JMO

[Whitequeen39]

The only thing I take exception with in this thread is people who don't agree with gay marriage being labled "homophobic". That is a big misconception. I am NOT afraid of homosexual people. My uncle is one. I don't agree with gay marriage, but if it happens to become legal then that will be the law. I also don't agree with abortion but it IS legal. I don't go out of my way to be nasty to gay people. I treat all people as kindly as I can. If it becomes legal for them to marry, then whatever. As long as I treat people decently, no matter what, then that is what matters.

"Phobic" means to fear or be afraid. Not agreeing with someone's lifestyle is NOT being afraid. There are those who don't agree with Christianity. Are they "Christian-phobic"? Think about it.

ITA :)

[Sha]

I don't agree with gay marriages either. But I am also not a homophobe. My brother is gay and I love him the same as I did before we "actually" knew. Thats not to say I agree with it, but it is his life not mine. I think marriage should remain between a man and a woman. JMO

I have to agree with bribella, I have an uncle who is gay. He and I both see this as it should not be a "Marriage" but a "civil union". Something concrete and legal to protect them legally and bond them as a union.

[Donnagg123]

Also, a phobia does not just mean fear of something it also means (according to websters dictionary) "A strong fear, dislike, or aversion", therefore homophobia (again according to websters dictionary) means "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals". Which means you can be afraid of homosexuals OR have an aversion (or dislike) of homosexuals OR be one who discriminates (which is "treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit") against homosexuals and still be considered a homophobe. HTH :)

[Azriel_LittleHawk]

wow.. you guys have made some good points.
i mainly put the homnophobic warning to try and keep this from degenerating into a squabble. i can understand how some would not like same sex marriage.
i just wish that these folks could get equal treatment under the law. thats all. this whole thing is what me mum calls "splitting hairs" why can't nationaly the PTB allow marriage/civil unions of those who are strong enough and in love enough to make that commitment to each other.?
it's just sad , in my mind, that in this day and age, this is such a bloody darn issue!!
hmm..ok..i get it now..i'm exspecting common sense from the gov't!! THATS MY MISTAKE!!
*ROTFL*
thanks for keeping it nice folks..i REALY appreciate it!!
Ciao!
Az

[momfromTN]

Also, a phobia does not just mean fear of something it also means (according to websters dictionary) "A strong fear, dislike, or aversion", therefore homophobia (again according to websters dictionary) means "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals". Which means you can be afraid of homosexuals OR have an aversion (or dislike) of homosexuals OR be one who discriminates (which is "treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit") against homosexuals and still be considered a homophobe. HTH :)

Well, I don't fall under that category at all. I don't dislike homosexuals. I simply don't agree with the lifestyle. I find the act of someone being with someone of the same sex something I don't agree with. HOWEVER, I tell no one what to do or how to live.

You can disagree with the way someone lives and still treat them fairly and like a human being. My dislike of that particular lifestyle is by no means irrational. If that is true, then people who don't like my lifestyle are irrational as well. Thats silly. Websters really needs to change that meaning, truthfully. It is a recently and misleading, made up word as far as I am concerned. How come people who hate Christians aren't called "Christphobics"? You only hear the "phobic" thing when pertaining to homosexuals. Kind of strange if you ask me. Why can't we disagree with something and not be labled like we are the devil incarnate? As long as we treat people respectfully, why should we have to agree with everything about them to avoid being labled as if we were an extremist religious nut? I also don't agree with the Amish lifestyle, but I don't dislike the Amish. Does that make me "Amishphobic"? I think not.

I just fail to see how disagreeing with someone makes them irrational.

[Faithfully]

I don't believe in gay marriage myself, I think marriage is for a man, and woman only, but I do believe they should have the choice of a civil union.

[Donnagg123]

How come people who hate Christians aren't called "Christphobics"? You only hear the "phobic" thing when pertaining to homosexuals.
It is not officially in the dictionary, but if you do a google people are using that exact thing to express a category of people who dislike christians, except they call it "christophobic" or "christophobia".

[stresseater]

I guess that people who disagree with recreational drug use are drugaphobics then. Don't like people who drinking...drinkaphobic. Although the addition of phobic has traditionally been used to explain the fear response, I think that overutilization of archaic definitions will eventually undermine any use of the suffix. Now if you look at the fear of mainstreaming these ideas to the point where they are taught to our children in school(oh wait that already happens ;) ) then I can see the use of phobia but then it would be a phobia of disemination of propaganda(or misinformation) right. Maybe we should expand it to a fuller word to express this * homopropagandphobia* Wow maybe this is where new words come from. If I ever get famous you guys remember ...I coined the word. :D :p ;) :D :D

***additional disclaimer. I am sure there are several words here that are misspelled. Possible run on sentances and misuse of the comma as well. If you feel the need to correct this, have at. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :D

[farren]

A word can be so limited. I think everyone should be able to say how they feel without a "word" that someone coined stereotyping them. There's usually more to how someone feels. Then again we live in the instant gratification, abbreviate as much as possible world now.

[stresseater]

Then again we live in the instant gratification, abbreviate as much as possible world now.
True, if we can reduce peoples' concerns to a single word or phrase it makes it easier to make their concerns seem inconsquential. :(

[momfromTN]

What I think the problem is it automatically lumps everyone who disagrees with homosexuality into the same group, as if we are ALL these bad and horrible people for daring to disagree with something. I had someone once tell me I was no better than the animals who killed that poor Matthew Shepherd because I happen to not agree with the homosexual lifestyle. I am sorry, but that couldn't possibly be further from the truth. You can disagree with someone's lifestyle without shouting it in their face or killing them. To me, the word is almost like a propaganda tool, as if to say, "well if you dare disagree with me, even if you are peaceful about it, you are totally wrong, etc." You know, that kind of thing. Life is NOT black and white like that.

[Willow]

I wasn't going to reply to this thread only because I wasn't sure how to say what I want and have it make sense but I'm going to try. lol

I don't think it's natural ( for lack of a better word) for two men or two women to sleep together. A man and a woman fit together perfectly and I think we were made that way for a reason. I am not a Christian so I'm not basing this on anything biblical. With that said if two men or two women want to marry I don't see how that is going to affect me. When a man and a woman marry it doesn't affect me so why would it affect me if two men or two women marry. As long as it's not affecting me what people do in their bedroom is none of my business.

[LuvBigRip]

My personal opinion is that marriage is between a man and a woman, however, I am not adverse to a civil union. I think that gay couples should be afforded the same legal benefits (and in some cases detriments) as heterosexual couples.

As for the whole California issue, the mayor went against the vote of the people of California who had voted against gay marriage.

On a final note: I think the gay community would be better served to start using the words civil union in lieu of marriage. I think, and this is JMO, that most people who object to marriage between homosexuals, would do a 180 if the terminolgy was changed.

[YNKYH8R]

Well, I don't fall under that category at all. I don't dislike homosexuals. I simply don't agree with the lifestyle. I find the act of someone being with someone of the same sex something I don't agree with. HOWEVER, I tell no one what to do or how to live.

You can disagree with the way someone lives and still treat them fairly and like a human being. My dislike of that particular lifestyle is by no means irrational. If that is true, then people who don't like my lifestyle are irrational as well. Thats silly. Websters really needs to change that meaning, truthfully. It is a recently and misleading, made up word as far as I am concerned. How come people who hate Christians aren't called "Christphobics"? You only hear the "phobic" thing when pertaining to homosexuals. Kind of strange if you ask me. Why can't we disagree with something and not be labled like we are the devil incarnate? As long as we treat people respectfully, why should we have to agree with everything about them to avoid being labled as if we were an extremist religious nut? I also don't agree with the Amish lifestyle, but I don't dislike the Amish. Does that make me "Amishphobic"? I think not.

I just fail to see how disagreeing with someone makes them irrational.

It, IMO, is not the people who diagree with the marriage issue. It is the people who say it is wrong. In another time people thought interracial dating, and schooling was wrong. It is unfair for someone, IMO, to deny anyone something that is common and held dear by all to people because of gender. Its gender descrimination.
If you disagree, fine, no problem. The vocal ones are the ones who come across as hateful: spitfull.
When I got married to my wife, we did it to show other people that we cared about each other, deeply; and basicaly made a public promise to be true to and love each other as long as we live.
Now, people are saying that these expressions of love are to not be heard all because of gender, and some words in a book? Am I antichristian? No, it is just that my relationship with God is different from yours. And that doesn't make me better or any less equeal than anyone else.
IMO, that was written a long time ago, when the true love between two people, gender not included, could not be wholey realized by the masses.

If you watch ER, then you know what I am talking about.

I can't begin to imagine how many people on this planet have to live a life such as Dr. Weaver's (character on ER).

Plus, this marriage issue I think shook people up really good and tight; when they realized how many tens of thousands of people turned out to be married. :)

[DreamWarrior]

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares what is or isnt between their legs...

[Donnagg123]

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares what is or isnt between their legs...

ITA :)

[RIRFM]

*cracks knuckles*

Ok...time for a little truth to dispel all of the emotion on this thread.

Re: "What's the big deal?", or "It doesn't effect me" -

Here's the big deal - 89% of all new AIDS cases come from the homosexual community. In the last 3 years, the rates of syphillis and chlamydia among homosexual men have increased 300%. I'll say that again - THREE HUNDRED PERCENT.

In any other circle of life, that'd be considered an epidemic. And you want them to be able to get married? What's next? Adoption?

What do you suppose will happen to your health insurance premiums once these "high-risk" individuals get "married" and are added to insurance rolls?

It DOES effect you.

Re: "What's the big deal - they love each other, and that's all that should matter!"

If love were all it took for two people to be able to get married, then what would stop a brother from marrying his sister? What would stop 3 people from all getting married? What would stop 18 people from all getting married? What would stop a woman from marrying her cat? It's just love, right?

Wrong. No matter how much y'all would like to spin it, marriage is an institution recognized by the state. In order to receive the benefits of that institution, you have to abide by the restrictions set forth by the state. Restrictions like - you can't marry someone of your own bloodline, you can't marry someone under the legal age, you can't marry someone of the same sex, and you can't marry an inanimate object. These rules are in place for a reason.

Re: "They have a right to get married!"

No, they don't. Marriage is not a civil right...it's an institution, as I stated in the above paragraph. If they're so concerned about what will happen to their house once one of them dies, they can contact a lawyer and have a provision put into their Will. Because, again, marriage is not a right.

To try and compare the "gay rights" movement to the "civil rights" movement is an affront to all African-Americans in this country. A black man being able to marry a white woman does not change the definition of an institution that's been in place since the dawn of time. Jack marrying Bruce DOES.

Re: "Separation of Chruch and State"

You couldn't be further off the mark. I challenge any one of you to find the phrase "separation of church and state" anywhere in the US Constitution.

You won't, however, because it simply doesn't exist. What IS written is:

"Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of a religion, nor prohibit the free exercise thereof."

Last I looked, Congress hadn't passed a law establishing Christianity as the official religion of the US.

However, those of you who are ignorant to the fact that this country was founded by Christian men need to do a little homework and bone up on the truth. Our founders were moral, righteous, Christian men.

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people" - President John Adams.

Now, we can get into the moral aspect of homosexuality. Any and all Christians on this board who support 'gay marriage' or even 'civil unions' ought to be ashamed of themselves and turn in their Bibles. As Christians we should not be supporting, condoning, or making excuses for sinful behavior, and there is NO confusion as to how God feels about the sexually immoral.
Homosexuality is an affront to God, just as every other sin. However, it so happens that homosexuality is unique in that it's one of the few sins that the Lord actually refers to as "an abomination". That's some strong stuff there.

To the believer - homosexuality is a sin, therefore homosexual "marriages" are doubly so.

To the non-believer - homosexuality is unnatural, detrimental to society (as it cannot add to procreation - the foundation of any civilized society), seeks to re-define an institution that has been the bedrock of society since the dawn of time, and perpetuates a high-health-risk lifestyle.

I hope you've found this informative.

Cheers,

The History Maker

[mom2cvam]

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares what is or isnt between their legs...

ITA and thats all I'm going to say. ;)

[RIRFM]

In another time people thought interracial dating, and schooling was wrong. It is unfair for someone, IMO, to deny anyone something that is common and held dear by all to people because of gender. Its gender descrimination.


Sorry, but your entire argument is flawed, because you're basing it on the assumption that homosexuality is a genetic trait.

It's not - and science has not been able to prove otherwise.

In fact, more evidence increasingly points to it being a combination of behavior/environment, rahter than something they're "born with". (Why would nature create a creature that can't/doesn't want to reproduce itself? It's counter-productive to the entire purpose of the propagation of the human race)

In truth, thousands upon thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle through therapy, prayer, and a desire to life right. In the same manner that alcoholics leave booze, and smokers leave Marlboro's, homosexuals can leave their unhealthy and unnatural behavior.

[RIRFM]

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares what is or isnt between their legs...

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares how young they are...

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares how immoral they are...

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares if there's more than one...

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares if I'm related to them...

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares if they're alive...

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares if they're human...

and down and down and down the rabbit hole we go....

where does it stop?

[Willow]

In truth, thousands upon thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle through therapy, prayer, and a desire to life right. In the same manner that alcoholics leave booze, and smokers leave Marlboro's, homosexuals can leave their unhealthy and unnatural behavior.

Do you mean they leave the homosexual lifestyle out of fear? As far as alcoholics leaving the booze that does not make the person any less an alcoholic.

[RIRFM]

Do you mean they leave the homosexual lifestyle out of fear? As far as alcoholics leaving the booze that does not make the person any less an alcoholic.

Out of fear? No. Out of an honest desire to straighten out their life? Yes.

Leaving an unhealthy lifestyle, regardless of what it is (drugs, booze, tobacco, sodmy, etc) DOES, in fact, make that person "less". They've left it. It is no more.

Just as an alcoholic is defined as a person addicted to alcohol...what happens to them once they break their addiction? They cease, by both defintion and behavior, to be an alcoholic. That's why it's called "being clean".

[gonnascream]

I'd like to welcome the 2 new members. with that said ::::::::

homosexuality IS genetic. most people know by the time they get thier first hair down there which side of the fence they want to play on.
In fact, more evidence increasingly points to it being a combination of behavior/environment, rahter than something they're "born with". (Why would nature create a creature that can't/doesn't want to reproduce itself? It's counter-productive to the entire purpose of the propagation of the human race)

If homosexuality severed no purpose as it dosen't act in procreation, WHY THE HECK DID GOD GIVE US STERILE MEN ???? Whats the point of sterile people being here if they are only taking up space (as you chalked it up to )

"If love were all it took for two people to be able to get married, then what would stop a brother from marrying his sister? What would stop 3 people from all getting married? What would stop 18 people from all getting married? What would stop a woman from marrying her cat? It's just love, right?"

1. thats legal in alabama (bet ya'll didn't know that one did ya ?)
2. happens all the time in poligamy communities
3. was authorized under the religion of sun yoi peet in 1941 in a hippie commune in washington state and the goverment had no say so cause it was done under a religouse ground which was not garnered by the goverment.
4. happened in 1986 to a woman in arizona. a woman in florida also married a shark.

Now, we can get into the moral aspect of homosexuality. Any and all Christians on this board who support 'gay marriage' or even 'civil unions' ought to be ashamed of themselves and turn in their Bibles

HAVE YOU EVEN READ THAT BOOK OR JUST THE PARTS YOU LIKE ????
I read the bible, and trust me, that is one LOVING guy, who was also VENGEFUL at the same time......Im pretty sure jesus is a modern guy, he's probably changed a few rules up there since he wrote the first draft. I don't think he's goning to turn away a guy just because he does "you know what with you know who". Then he would have to look at himself and ask "well, where's my forgiveness ??" Im pretty sure if god can forgive jimmy swaggart (who got it on with I hooker on tape) Im pretty darn sure he can forgive liberace !

However, those of you who are ignorant to the fact that this country was founded by Christian men need to do a little homework and bone up on the truth. Our founders were moral, righteous, Christian men.

you almost made me pee on myself with that. ALMOST ! these guys were full of insest, inbreeding, and as much sodomy as you can shake a stick at....and didn't god say sodomy was a no -no ? Thoms jefferson himmself had a craving for black women (EVEN THOUGH HE WAS MARRIED TO A WHITE WOMAN ) fathered some out of wedlock kids, and hid them out in the toolshed so he would ruin his white christian moral image....jefferson was the first case of BABIES DADDY. So lets rack this up.....adultry, itteracial, ashamed....yeah he was a moral guy.

"Separation of Chruch and State"

you know why that rule is in place NOW ???? because they watched gods followers over time, and to tell the truth, they got pretty scary...they act like fanatics, and I guess that if they wanted a country that wasn't full of sheep, they had to start drawing a FINE LINE. Remember, the Klu Klax Klan was a "fine christian gathering" until the goverment noticed they would take the law into thier own hands and hang the "negro" from a tree because they considered themselves judge, jury and the oak tree was the exicutioner. didn't matter what the law said, they went by the fact it was the chrristian thing to do.

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people" - President John Adams.

give me a break. half of them were doing something immoral as they were writing it.

[YankeeMary]

*cracks knuckles*

Ok...time for a little truth to dispel all of the emotion on this thread.

Re: "What's the big deal?", or "It doesn't effect me" -

Here's the big deal - 89% of all new AIDS cases come from the homosexual community. In the last 3 years, the rates of syphillis and chlamydia among homosexual men have increased 300%. I'll say that again - THREE HUNDRED PERCENT.

In any other circle of life, that'd be considered an epidemic. And you want them to be able to get married? What's next? Adoption?

What do you suppose will happen to your health insurance premiums once these "high-risk" individuals get "married" and are added to insurance rolls?

It DOES effect you.

Re: "What's the big deal - they love each other, and that's all that should matter!"

If love were all it took for two people to be able to get married, then what would stop a brother from marrying his sister? What would stop 3 people from all getting married? What would stop 18 people from all getting married? What would stop a woman from marrying her cat? It's just love, right?

Wrong. No matter how much y'all would like to spin it, marriage is an institution recognized by the state. In order to receive the benefits of that institution, you have to abide by the restrictions set forth by the state. Restrictions like - you can't marry someone of your own bloodline, you can't marry someone under the legal age, you can't marry someone of the same sex, and you can't marry an inanimate object. These rules are in place for a reason.

Re: "They have a right to get married!"

No, they don't. Marriage is not a civil right...it's an institution, as I stated in the above paragraph. If they're so concerned about what will happen to their house once one of them dies, they can contact a lawyer and have a provision put into their Will. Because, again, marriage is not a right.

To try and compare the "gay rights" movement to the "civil rights" movement is an affront to all African-Americans in this country. A black man being able to marry a white woman does not change the definition of an institution that's been in place since the dawn of time. Jack marrying Bruce DOES.

Re: "Separation of Chruch and State"

You couldn't be further off the mark. I challenge any one of you to find the phrase "separation of church and state" anywhere in the US Constitution.

You won't, however, because it simply doesn't exist. What IS written is:

"Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of a religion, nor prohibit the free exercise thereof."

Last I looked, Congress hadn't passed a law establishing Christianity as the official religion of the US.

However, those of you who are ignorant to the fact that this country was founded by Christian men need to do a little homework and bone up on the truth. Our founders were moral, righteous, Christian men.

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people" - President John Adams.

Now, we can get into the moral aspect of homosexuality. Any and all Christians on this board who support 'gay marriage' or even 'civil unions' ought to be ashamed of themselves and turn in their Bibles. As Christians we should not be supporting, condoning, or making excuses for sinful behavior, and there is NO confusion as to how God feels about the sexually immoral.
Homosexuality is an affront to God, just as every other sin. However, it so happens that homosexuality is unique in that it's one of the few sins that the Lord actually refers to as "an abomination". That's some strong stuff there.

To the believer - homosexuality is a sin, therefore homosexual "marriages" are doubly so.

To the non-believer - homosexuality is unnatural, detrimental to society (as it cannot add to procreation - the foundation of any civilized society), seeks to re-define an institution that has been the bedrock of society since the dawn of time, and perpetuates a high-health-risk lifestyle.

I hope you've found this informative.

Cheers,

The History Maker


WOW!!! very well said and IMO you slammed no one..thank you.
I will ride the flames here with you on this...I agree.
This is not to say that I am against Homosexuals, as a CHRISTIAN I love (or try real hard to) everyone. I, too, think it is a sin, my Bible tells me so. I can not judge them according to my Bible, but I don't have to fight for their "right" which, I am against. I normally do not get on such topics, since everyone will disagree and eventually there will be an arguement, but I felt compelled to respond here. I so agree with the insurance comments you made, that is so true, but I don't think alot of people, myself included, have even thought about the big picture or the long run.
I truly am happy to see that this thread , so far, has made it with no bitter words or hatefulness, that says alot about our wonderful BBS family. And just for the record, my brother is gay, and I love him as much as anyone could love their brother, I just am against his lifestyle, because of MY up bringing and MY religion.

[Donnagg123]

Here's the big deal - 89% of all new AIDS cases come from the homosexual community. In the last 3 years, the rates of syphillis and chlamydia among homosexual men have increased 300%. I'll say that again - THREE HUNDRED PERCENT.

Where did you find these statistics? PLMK :)

[Willow]

Out of fear? No. Out of an honest desire to straighten out their life? Yes.

Leaving an unhealthy lifestyle, regardless of what it is (drugs, booze, tobacco, sodmy, etc) DOES, in fact, make that person "less". They've left it. It is no more.

Just as an alcoholic is defined as a person addicted to alcohol...what happens to them once they break their addiction? They cease, by both defintion and behavior, to be an alcoholic. That's why it's called "being clean".

I'm sorry but I disagree. Just because an alcoholic stops drinking does not mean he is no longer an alcoholic. I know people who have gone through the 12 step program and go to AA and they will disagree with you too. I don't think it's up to us to judge anyone.

[YankeeMary]

I'm sorry but I disagree. Just because an alcoholic stops drinking does not mean he is no longer an alcoholic. I know people who have gone through the 12 step program and go to AA and they will disagree with you too. I don't think it's up to us to judge anyone.


Gotta agree with this statement. Also I thought alcoholism was considered a disease?!?! I also think it can be hereditary...at least the addictive gene is I believe.

[Angelseyes28]

Just as an alcoholic is defined as a person addicted to alcohol...what happens to them once they break their addiction? They cease, by both defintion and behavior, to be an alcoholic. That's why it's called "being clean".

Actually once an alcoholic stops drinking they are considered a "reformed alcoholic" but that is neither apples nor oranges.
You have been banned, not because you voiced your opinion, but because you had to create a new account to do so. That being said, you have now lost use of both accounts.

[Donnagg123]

Gotta agree with this statement. Also I thought alcoholism was considered a disease?!?! I also think it can be hereditary...at least the addictive gene is I believe.

You are right it can be genetic. Also it is kind of like pandora's box. Once you open those channels in the brain that you cross over to become addicted how can you really go back 100%? I mean that is not to say that every alcoholic who stops drinking will at some point go back to drinking but the feelings are there that at any point they have the potential to go back to drinking. I know this was off the original topic, but just wanted to make that comment.

[thedragonlady]

Also I think RIRFM forgets that the Bible was not written by God. It was stories about God written by men.

[janelle]

Also I think RIRFM forgets that the Bible was not written by God. It was stories about God written by men.

If you are a Christian you believe the bibe is the inspired word of God. These men wrote the bible with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit who is the third person in one God. We believe God does not make mistakes, so the word of
God is true and the path to live by.

Of course, the bible is misinterpreted all the time. Things are taken out of context and made to seem what they are not. The scholars of the church have studied the bible since it was written and they have helped us to understand it. One needs to understand the Jewish people and customs in order to understand the whole bible.

If you are Christian the bible is not a story book, it is the inspired word of
God to His people on how to live a good life, full of happiness.

[taz69]

I just feel that any "couple' who loves each other, and is together - should have some basic rights! Can you imagine not being able to go see you husband/wife in the hospital if they were dying? I am happily married with 2 kids - but I don't think that should make me more able to see a loved one in the hospital - or share in an estate that was built between two consenting adults. What we do in bed between our loves - shoudl stay there - i am straight - but do not feel that that the people that are not should lose their rights as partners.

[ahippiechic]

I'm a Christian, but I don't think the Bible is the inspired word of God. Not all of it anyway, in it's present form. The Bible WAS written by man, over a LONG period of time. And translated MANY times. Ok, way off topic I know.

Who I marry and/or have sex with is no one else's business. Not yours and definately not the governments. As long as it's between to consenting adults, no one should be able to tell me who I should or shouldn't marry.

[janelle]

I just feel that any "couple' who loves each other, and is together - should have some basic rights! Can you imagine not being able to go see you husband/wife in the hospital if they were dying? I am happily married with 2 kids - but I don't think that should make me more able to see a loved one in the hospital - or share in an estate that was built between two consenting adults. What we do in bed between our loves - shoudl stay there - i am straight - but do not feel that that the people that are not should lose their rights as partners.

As long as the patient says they want a certain person to be with them in the hospital then it is allowed. The other person would not be kept out.

You can gve anyone you want the power of attorney for you and it is legal for them to make decisions for you.

[Bohemut]

As long as the patient says they want a certain person to be with them in the hospital then it is allowed. The other person would not be kept out.

You can gve anyone you want the power of attorney for you and it is legal for them to make decisions for you.

Sorry Janelle these two statements are not true for gays.

When a gay person is in the hospital his/her family can (and very often do) refuse to let the partner visit. The partner is then kept out. So a sick or dying person is denied being attended by the person they probably most love and care for. It wouldn't and couldn't happen with a married (man, female) couple. So how is it right for a gay couple?

Secondly in most cases a power of attorney, as well as wills and other legal matters set up between gay couples can be overridden by one of the couples relatives. Again this would not be the case with a married couple, but it is for gays.

These are basic desires of the gay community--to have the right to decide for themselves who they leave their property to, who they can have speak for them (as a spouse can) when they are unable, and who can hold their hand as they lie dying. Who are we to say just because we don't agree with their lifestyle they have less rights than anyone else?

I am not gay. My uncle was, and yes, he died of AIDS. I have many friends in the gay community. I would wish for them the same rights and benefits that I am entitled to as a straight person. And IMHO it doesn't really matter how they "became" gay, whether by genetics or environment, they are still human beings and should have equal rights. I believe that we can not judge anyone--that's God's place--we can only judge if we want them, or not, in our life. One thing that Jesus said that I try to live by is "Love thy neighbor as thyself." How is dening someone equal rights because we don't agree with them love? I guess my mind is just too broad.

[Azriel_LittleHawk]

WOW!!
thank you for banning that person. i left for a day and come back and this thread was STEAMING!!
GEESH!!
sad thing is, i know MANY people who AREN'T gay who are HIV positive. unsafe sex with whomever is a bad thing. and sadly from what i have looked at , most venerial diseases including HIV/AIDS are rising QUICKEST in our younger members of the population. yay! for the moral high ground..seems to me that thinking is getting alot of folks dead..slowly & painfuly. sorry tangent # 3 billion an 4 noted. no offence to anyone intended..just my opinion. morality is fine as long as it doesn't raise the death rates. i would much rather have COMMON SENSE than morality any day!!
i can see where some people may "get out of the lifestyle" especialy with folks ragin at them like that. i'd be scared to. but..how many of them are living a lie?
i was quite astounded by that persons reaction..i can only think..1. RADICAL SCARY person needing severe treatment from the nearest mental health facility/anger managment, or 2.CLOSET CASE to scared to follow their natural leanings.

i personaly beleive it is genetic. brain scans of straight versus gay folks have proved it to me. bet those of us who are bi realy screw with those tests eh? *L*
it just we are allowing the gov't into to many aspects of our lives as it is..why let em get a toe hold in our freechoice ?
and i go on...as me mum says" my mouth runneth over"
take care folks!!
Ciao!
Az
PS: i am not anti american, nor anti christian, but..considering that this country was founded by people ESCAPING religious persecution who then turn around and STEAL THE LAND from the Native Americans & THEN ATTEMPT GENOCIDE on them IF THEY DIDNA CONVERT To Christianity! um..i can see where national confusion to this very day, could be an issue..on all fronts.<--IMHO!!!!!

[hotwheelstx]

JMO-Doesn't the bible say somewhere Do unto others as you would do to them???? Doesn't that apply anymore??? So, that means if you color your hair purple I need to flame you for it! I think not. I'm speaking from someoe who was brought up an Atheist as well.

With all that being said let me state that I have a cousin that recently has come out of the "closet". This young man is intelligent, witty, happy, handsome, very well liked. Graduated with full honors from CalTech University in 2003 w/a full scholarship and received another scholarship to the school of his choice for his Masters in Computer Science.

Let me tell you where it's gotten him with his "family"....mother. She's a "Christian" and thinks that being gay is WRONG. She now will not even speak or acknowledge him. Thinks "deprogramming" him will work. IT'S NOT GOING TO.

He's still the same young man I watched take his first steps, go to school for the first day, play football, join the choir, have lots of friends and make honor roll every year in school, give me kisses, play video games.....he's 18 years my jr.

When he graduated from high school and went to college he then decided to take an internship in Thailand. Only then was he able to tell me and me only that he was gay and that he couldn't tell his mother for fear of rejection from her and others.

He moved across the world to get away from the "phobia" of others.

He's now in Australia to get even further away where he can be accepted by others without prejudice for the most part.

He said something to me in an email the other day that really hit home.....Just because you're (me) are in a wheelchair does that mean that I will be too if I touch you, hug you, give you a kiss??? NO, IT DOESN'T. Same applies to him.

If he's gay or straight he's still the same young man that I've watched thru the years grow up into a very sweet, caring human being.

As for the governor of New Jersey....I admire him for what he did. He was honest and upfront with his affair. I truly believe that it's between he and his family. If his wife and mother of his child can understand and accept why can't we all????

[YNKYH8R]

Sorry, but your entire argument is flawed, because you're basing it on the assumption that homosexuality is a genetic trait.

I never said anything about genetics, I was talking about descrimination.

Basically I was saying that it is not right to not allow two people to marry because or gender.

That's it.

(I know this is a late response but, I finally got the other computer working; the RedSox were winning; you know how it goes,,,couldn't get away.) :D

[JKATHERINE]

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares what is or isnt between their legs...


Well put!!!

[JKATHERINE]

Sorry, but your entire argument is flawed, because you're basing it on the assumption that homosexuality is a genetic trait.

It's not - and science has not been able to prove otherwise.

In fact, more evidence increasingly points to it being a combination of behavior/environment, rahter than something they're "born with". (Why would nature create a creature that can't/doesn't want to reproduce itself? It's counter-productive to the entire purpose of the propagation of the human race)

In truth, thousands upon thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle through therapy, prayer, and a desire to life right. In the same manner that alcoholics leave booze, and smokers leave Marlboro's, homosexuals can leave their unhealthy and unnatural behavior.

Don't you mean brainwashing? lol

And it hasn't been PROVEN that homosexuality ISN'T genetic either... :rolleyes:

[JKATHERINE]

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares how young they are...

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares how immoral they are...

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares if there's more than one...

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares if I'm related to them...

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares if they're alive...

the way i figure it, if you are lucky enough to find love, who cares if they're human...

and down and down and down the rabbit hole we go....

where does it stop?

Uh, no one's asking to marry their brother, sister, dead next door neighbor or their cat....they're simply asking to marry someone of the same sex. I understand that you're trying to say that if homosexual people are granted the right to marry that others will want to go to the extremes that you have mentioned (yep, there was that woman in Europe who got to marry her dead fiance) BUT, there are waaaaaaaaay more homosexuals then there are people who want to marry their cat. Homosexuality is a way of life, marrying your cat is not. And who are you to say it's immoral or unnatural? Not everyone has the same beliefs (ie not everyone is Christian and just because they are not does not make them bad or wrong) and that includes the belief (or not) in God and in the Bible (which I personally don't hold a lot of faith in because I personally don't believe what is in there)...

JMO