How To Explain Gay Rights To An Idiot

[Damocles]

Except the interracial marriage argument does not hold water, since gay is a behavior.

So is heterosexuality. This doesn't hold water any more than the same arguments made against interracial marriage did back in the day.

Either government is limited as it should be, or we should just give up on that Constitution thing. I'd prefer some things I dislike be allowed than to give up on personal freedoms and limited government.

 

[poet]

1. I am not an Atheist.
2. You don't have to be psychic, Christ made it clear that "The Law" still applied. That the Bible doesn't show him mentioning sins does not mean they are no longer sins.

The Levitical Code?????????????? Are you crazy? If that's so, then a whole bunch of people are going to Hell for eating goo gobs of shellfish, and mixing fabrics.
The Levitical Code has been in dispute for time in memoriam. Are you clear on what constitutes "sin" and what does not? Christ didn't speak to homosexuality. Wonder why?>

 

[poet]

Then please stop talking about marriage, which you arguably know nothing about, and especially stop talking about my family, which you absolutely know nothing about.

Your daddy is gay, your mom a gay hooker. Make me stop talking about them and you. Strumpet.

 

[Damocles]

The Levitical Code?????????????? Are you crazy? If that's so, then a whole bunch of people are going to Hell for eating goo gobs of shellfish, and mixing fabrics.
The Levitical Code has been in dispute for time in memoriam. Are you clear on what constitutes "sin" and what does not? Christ didn't speak to homosexuality. Wonder why?>

Incorrect. He made a clear differentiation between "The Law" and "cleansing". You are intelligent enough to understand the New Covenant.

Basically: Acts that were sinful are still sinful but things you have to do to be "clean" enough to enter the Temple were overcome by the one single act of sacrifice by Jesus.

So, you no longer have to wash your feet to go to temple, or kick your wife out of the house when she is on her period, those were things you did to remain "clean" enough to go to temple. However, cheating on your wife or sex before marriage were still sins.

 

[DamnYankee]

So is heterosexuality. This doesn't hold water any more than the same arguments made against interracial marriage did back in the day.

Either government is limited as it should be, or we should just give up on that Constitution thing. I'd prefer some things I dislike be allowed than to give up on personal freedoms and limited government.

States have their own Constitutions and they regulate marriage. Mine says that its between one man and one woman.

Homosexuality is a deviant behavior, while heterosexual relations are required in order for society to survive.

 

[DamnYankee]

Your daddy is gay, your mom a gay hooker. Make me stop talking about them and you. Strumpet.

By all means, keep talking about stuff that you know nothing about.

 

[Damocles]

States have their own Constitutions and they regulate marriage. Mine says that its between one man and one woman.

Homosexuality is a deviant behavior, while heterosexual relations are required in order for society to survive.

Which, again, is not reason enough for government to overstep and get into your personal life. To sanction your own specific form of beliefs about how important "normal" is. We've already shown that "normal" cannot possibly be the rule and guide for marriage. It would be stupid to limit it based on people doing "normal" things. Too many things we accept because they aren't "icky" are also not normal.

You would need to prove that there would be no more heterosexual relationships if we allowed gays to marry in order for government to have reasonable cause to restrict our personal lives in this way. You won't be able to do it.

 

[Damocles]

BTW, poet.

Please remember this: Damocles is not an Atheist.

I'll say it a different way: Just because Damocles is not Christian, does not mean he is an Atheist.

And I'll say it thrice to make it real for the Wicca among us.

I am not an Atheist.

 

[poet]

Incorrect. He made a clear differentiation between "The Law" and "cleansing". You are intelligent enough to understand the New Covenant.

Basically: Acts that were sinful are still sinful but things you have to do to be "clean" enough to enter the Temple were overcome by the one single act of sacrifice by Jesus.

So, you no longer have to wash your feet to go to temple, or kick your wife out of the house when she is on her period, those were things you did to remain "clean" enough to go to temple. However, cheating on your wife or sex before marriage were still sins.

Really. And all of our future sins are paid for with the blood of Christ. Ones we have yet to commit. All that is required is that we ask for forgiveness, and strive to do better.
I studied Episcopal catechism for a year, and sang liturgical mass for 3 years. I understand the New Covenant, and church doctrine and dogma. You?

 

[NOVA]

That might be the 2nd most idiotic thing you've said on here (the "sanctity of marriage" comment being the 1st, of course...)

.....I try to make the post as easy as I can for you simple-minded guys and of course, even then, you can't address the posts..........as usual.

You should start posting cartoons like Signalmankenny, he at least entertains us sometimes.

I realize you can't tell us HOW the laws are unequal, and

If you can't explain this "sanctity of marriage" stuff, you shouldn't bring it into the conversation.

 

[DamnYankee]

Which, again, is not reason enough for government to overstep and get into your personal life. To sanction your own specific form of beliefs about how important "normal" is. We've already shown that "normal" cannot possibly be the rule and guide for marriage. It would be stupid to limit it based on people doing "normal" things. Too many things we accept because they aren't "icky" are also not normal.

You would need to prove that there would be no more heterosexual relationships if we allowed gays to marry in order for government to have reasonable cause to restrict our personal lives in this way. You won't be able to do it.

I'm not the one advocating change, so its not up to me to prove a negative, or prove that not allowing the change would be detrimental, or catastrophic as defined by your straw man argument. You have it backwards.

 

[Damocles]

Really. And all of our future sins are paid for with the blood of Christ. Ones we have yet to commit. All that is required is that we ask for forgiveness, and strive to do better.
I studied Episcopal catechism for a year, and sang liturgical mass for 3 years. I understand the New Covenant, and church doctrine and dogma. You?

Only if you ignore what repent meant when Jesus said it. I've explained this before on the site. Repent doesn't mean what people think it does today. You don't get to just say "sorry"... The Greek word used denotes a complete change of mind and action, not just saying "sorry"...

Basically, you need to regret and STOP the sin.

And I studied in the Bible College at our church, as I described before. The Bible in Greek (ancient greek), the Bible in Hebrew, etc. for over 11 years. I translated for the deaf during three sermons a week, was in the Prison ministry, et al.

I can go on but you'll promptly "forget" and call me an Atheist tomorrow because you refuse to allow actual information to flow into your mind.

I may be a Buddhist, but I am a Buddhist that knows more than most about the Bible.

 

[DamnYankee]

Really. And all of our future sins are paid for with the blood of Christ. Ones we have yet to commit. All that is required is that we ask for forgiveness, and strive to do better.
I studied Episcopal catechism for a year, and sang liturgical mass for 3 years. I understand the New Covenant, and church doctrine and dogma. You?

And you still don't understand that homosexuality is an egregious sin? You must be just plain stupid.

 

[Damocles]

Your three years is a weak approximation of almost understanding. Almost everybody studies the Catechism, but most of them are still do not understand the religion as well as they should.

 

[Damocles]

And you still don't understand that homosexuality is an egregious sin? You must be just plain stupid.

Not any more egregious than any other. Sin is sin, DY. According to the Bible even the simplest sin without Grace will still net you a spiritual death.

 

[Onceler]

.....I try to make the post as easy as I can for you simple-minded guys and of course, even then, you can't address the posts..........as usual.

You should start posting cartoons like Signalmankenny, he at least entertains us sometimes.

I realize you can't tell us HOW the laws are unequal, and

If you can't explain this "sanctity of marriage" stuff, you shouldn't bring it into the conversation.

Like I said, dumbo - I didn't "bring it into the conversation." Righties did, as righties always do. It's not something the "left" had "latched onto." It's something the righties talk about whenever same sex marriage comes up.

Idjit.

 

[NOVA]

I didn't bring it up first, bravs. The right always does - in just about every argument re: same sex marriage, the phrase "sanctity of marriage" is always brought up - by the RIGHT. They also refer to amendments regarding same sex marriage as "sanctity of marriage" amendments.

Seriously - you claiming that the "left" has latched onto the phrase is probably as idiotic as anything you have ever said on here. And that's really saying something.

Unless I missed a post or two...YOU were the only that brought it up.......you keeping whining about it.....
and I'm not familar with any amendments about it, so you've got me there....sounds like a religious thing....

 

[poet]

Your three years is a weak approximation of almost understanding. Almost everybody studies the Catechism, but most of them are still do not understand the religion as well as they should.

WTF? You can't possibly comment on what you think I know. Not everyone studies catechism. I had a course in religion for 3 years and attended a Christian Brothers School for a year. And served mass for more than 10 years.

 

[poet]

And you still don't understand that homosexuality is an egregious sin? You must be just plain stupid.

You're confused, as usual. All your histrionics and flailing is not going to convince me that your beliefs hold any water. Do you think you appear righteous in the eyes of the board, because of them? No one fucking cares. I know I don't. The only one you're trying to convince that you're right, is yourself.

 

[NOVA]

WTF? You can't possibly comment on what you think I know. Not everyone studies catechism. I had a course in religion for 3 years and attended a Christian Brothers School for a year. And served mass for more than 10 years.

I don't know about the school, but they make a hell of a good brandy......
served mass, huh ?......is that where you got your indoctrination ?

so whats the history of "marriage"......
Was it started as a religious rite to recognize the union of a man and women.....
Its certainly mentioned in the Bible isn't it......
How about
Adam and Eve.........husband and wife ?
Joseph and Mary.....husband and wife....