Oh people don't choose to be homosexual...tell that to 5 girls I went to undergrad with that thought they were gay...and now they're married/dating men! Maybe some don't choose...but some damn well do....and like I said....I don't have a choice in whether I want to be Black. I can't go to church and get saved and say "Oh wow....I'm Free....I'm not Black anymore!!" :mad:

Why does one have to be labeled homophobic to disagree with something. I don't like it when people wear white after labor day...doesn't mean I hate them. I understand homosexuality and do not fear it. I just happen to think its a perversion of nature.

And here we go with saying our presidents were slave owners...and that proves what??.... I love the way people point out the mistakes/misjudgments/prejudices of our forefathers as if that nullifies the fact that this is the greatest country in the world and that our moral "stick to it-ness" was stronger back then. Just as the Africans in Africa are enlaving their own people TODAY...doesn't mean that Africa isnt a beautiful country....to visit.

thank you!!!!
 

very well said sf!!!!

Last time I checked a donkey and a human being were not anywhere on the same level and to compare a relationship that two human beings share with that of an animal and a human is insulting.
On your previous comments in reference to communism, those goals discussed by The United States (a democracy) on the goals of a communist state are hardly set in stone, considering that the United States has continued to re-affirm its role as the "worlds police" by spreading democracy through out the world (which in theory is a good thing). However much like the U.S. we can not decide what the goals of ANOTHER government should be (Iraq is a mess), other people should not be able to dictate what others choose to do with other consenting adults. If the case of homosexual marriage is a moral issue so are many other parts of society. Including but not limited to
1. Smoking cigarettes
2. Consuming alchohol
3. Watching porn
4. Abortion
5. Posting on greekchat (have you seen the "Have you Ever thread?" ;)

and the list goes on and on, should we also dictate to sensible adults all the things they should be able to do with their lives based on others morals. Its interesting you mentioned communism as a reference when the basis of its idea removes choice, which is exactly what a democracy is against. I am quite religious and believe in my Lord and savior, but that is MY belief if you WANT to share it it's YOUR decision as a human. If we want to be religious Jesus gave those a CHOICE on if they believed in him and his teachings, he did not FORCE anyone to believe or conform to what he said. That is a personal choice, that one makes. Much like marriage.

Honeykiss1974, elements of this were discussed in the "Gays" thread on APhiA Avenue. That might or might not be what you're referring to.

By the way I agree with most of what Love_Spell_6 has posted on this topic. People can do what they want (as we see on TV daily) but I get so sick and tired of people who disagree with the alternative lifestyle getting almost automatically carriacutured (sp) as homophobic, haters, insecure and all the rest.

if everybody get's an opinion, shouldn't that mean everybody?

Interesting Topic
 

Hmmmmmmmmmm, I agree that the belief that homosexuality is wrong is based in religion alone. Most who do not agree with gays would say that they feel this way b/c it is against God and the Bible (so an atheist probably wouldn't be affected by this at all). That's fine, as a Chrstian I personally don't agree w/homosexuality either. However, as was stated b4, this counrty is founded on freedom of religion and separation of Church and State. That means that laws cannot be dictated based on any one's religious beliefs or values. If you feel that abiding by our constitution makes you a "part time Christian" then you should argue that the constitution is wrong. You should argue to the Supreme Court that the Constitution should be changed. However, until that happens, we have to abide by it (inso much as the laws that we write). However, to give you another example of separation of Church and state, that is less disputed: many states honor "common law marriages". However, we all know that the Bible speaks against sex outside of marriage. Should we also change this law? or better yet, should we make it illegal for couples to engage in these sorts of partnerships/sexual relationships?
Just my thoughts,
Marie

I agree with you, Wonderful1908.

Since Christianity is the big "vilator of the moment", will all other religions be held to the same standard and rule? There are plenty religions out there besides Christianity. If I deem the pyramid on the back of our currency to be religious in nature, will it also be removed?

We can't just say "well, common sense tells us....", because everyone's rule of common sense is different. For example, it didn't make sense to me for the Ten Commandments monument in Alabama to be removed from the courthouse, but yet and still in this very same courthouse (and all others) a person must swear upon a Bible " to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God"? :confused:

I don't believe in common law marriages either. Even if I wasn't religious, I would feel the same for reasons that don't even have to do with religion (women issues).

I don't see Islam, Shinto, Judaism, Buddahism or any other religion, using religious justification as reason for a marriage not being allowed. I don't believe that christianity is the villian here at all, (that would be to easy) the villian here is CHOICE. Gays who want to marry choose to do something outside the realm of Christianity, and it is frowned upon.
If we agree that people should be allowed to be Christians and believe in Jesus freely why can't people choose not to, and not have to worry about their personal choices being dictated for them, Who likes being told what to do or believe?
I want someone to answer this question: outside of the Bible what is your basis for gay marriage being wrong?

If someone disagrees with "gay marriages" (for Biblical reasons), why do they need to justify it using a basis"outside of the Bible" that basically says that marriage is a scared act between a man and woman?

Is any other basis ok except a Biblical one?

So, ok, If the whole point of this is a legal rights issue,let's get rid of any legal distinction or respect that marriage currently has. There should no longer be ANY legal distinctions between those who are married and those who are single. Let's abolish the practice of divorce (since people will be able to leave a relationship like single folks with no fear of legal consequences such as alimony, etc.), different tax rates of married couples, and make polygamy ok (man/woman to take more than one wife/husband ).

I don't think that this issue requires one to turn their beliefs off and on. This country is one that was founded on the separation of church and state. For each citizen to enjoy all of the rights afforded to them under the constitution, that separation must be maintained, regardless of what your (not you personally) personal beliefs are.

What happens if the majority religion of the country changes? What happens if Christians become the minority and this country is run by Gozer worshippers? I sure don't want them telling me how to live my life based on what their god tells them is right. This may sound extreme, but it really isn't. It's important to be able to see another side of an issue.

Hello all,
This is my first post in Greekchat. I would like to say that although I don't have a view as yet as to whether gay marriages should be legalized, as a law student, I would like to comment on the notion of separation of church and state.

Although as far as I can tell, courts try to *formally* uphold a separation of church and state, to some extent, judicial opinions in many areas of law like freedom of speech is informed by the court deciding whether the state's interest in maintaining morality, etc. outweighs the individual's right to expression. So, for instance, when the court considered whether child porn, hate speech, etc. should be constitutionally-allowed it factored in the state's interests, which were largely based in morality, which is largely informed by the *dominant religious views* in this country.

So although there is a formal separation of church and state, to some extent, many, if not most, laws are informed by the moral fabric of the country - which is often a result of core religious values. So at the end of the day, I think that the "separation of church and state" is not as separate as we might think.

This thread has opened my eyes to a lot in the past few days. My reasons against same sex marriages are totally religious. My fear comes from the fact that God destroyed a city for this, so what is stopping him from destroying America since we are condoning the same behavior? But as ClassyLady has pointed out what if the majority religion changes? I would not want to be subject to the beliefs of others because I will only follow the beliefs of the God that I worship. I am still against gay marriages, but this thread has really helped to me see a lot.

Re: Interesting Topic
 

ITA...

Ok lets see........reasons to be against homosexuality other than religion..... I believe its against the rules of nature. If the population was to become homosexual, natural conception would cease, and we would have to rely on test tubes and sperm donors to replenish the earth. I do not believe this is natural. I also believe its just as disgusting and un-natural as beastiality and necrophilia. Next I assume we'll be in court saying if a man loves a dead person or an animal....who are we to stand in his way of eternal love!! :rolleyes:

Also, someone mentioned it was insulting to say compare homosexual marriage to marrying an animal. Well I am asserting that once you change the institution of marriage from a man and a woman....all is fair game.. A man marrying 16 women and folx wanting to marry animals (if you think this is not realistic...think again). I think it is insulting to insist that a marital union consist of two men or two women...or anything other than a man and a woman....but that's just me....

Also...it still bewilders me that folx don't think some people choose to be bi/homosexual....:rolleyes:

Lastly...I think its great that we can exchange somewhat controversial ideas about such hot topics. But at the end of the day...we all have to live with the decisions we make....and the current state of society (fatherless homes, promiscuity, STD rates etc..) are the DIRECT reflection of how we choose to live our lives.

Link between Homosexuality and Pedophilia
 

Someone asked for reasons to be against homosexuality other than religion....here's another....


URL: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2000/oct/00100603.html
Back to Previous Page | Print This Page



LifeSite Daily News
Friday October 6, 2000


LINK BETWEEN HOMOSEXUALITY AND PEDOPHILIA
NEW YORK, Oct 6 (LSN.ca) - Dr. Judith Reisman, formerly a research professor at American University, veteran pornography researcher and expert witness before the attorney general's commission on pornography has reached disturbing conclusions about the link between homosexuality and pedophilia. WorldNetDaily reports on Dr. Reisman's research in the current issue of their magazine. Contrary to the view expounded by homosexual activists that gays are no more likely to sexually moles children, Dr Reisman says research proves the opposite. Homosexual men are anxious to recruit young boys -- a practice that is becoming easier thanks to sex education and "diversity programs" in schools that teach children to consider homosexuality as both acceptable and normal, says Reisman.

Reisman conducted two recent scientific studies. "Crafting 'Gay' Children: An Inquiry into the Abuse of Vulnerable Youth Via Establishment Media and the School Room" and "Partner Solicitation Language as a Reflection of Male Sexual Orientation," are continuations of the work Reisman began with her study, "Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences."

Reisman's research based on government statistics for 1992 notes that: Of 86 - 88 million heterosexual men, 9 percent of them victimized 8 million girls under age 18, which constitutes 25 percent of all girls. An uncertain percentage of the estimated 2 million homosexual men victimized 6-8 million boys, under age 18, amounting to 17 - 24 percent of all boys. Therefore, considered in the aggregate, 3 to 4 boys are sexually molested per homosexual adult male. Only .09 girls are sexually molested per heterosexual adult male, which is to say that, on average, 1 in 11 heterosexual males victimizes a girl under 18.

Further corroborating these findings, the Journal of the American Medical Association published the following facts:
50 percent of male AIDS victims reported having sex with an adult male by the age of 16.
20 percent of male AIDS victims had sex with an adult male by age 10.

For more see WorldNetDaily at:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky...pe_sacre.shtml




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


(c) Copyright: LifeSite Daily News is a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).

NEWS TIPS to lsn@lifesite.net or call 1-866-787-9947 or (416) 204-1687 ext. 444

Please help us to continue this service. Mail contributions to: Interim Publishing, Att'n LifeSite, 104 Bond St. E., Toronto, ON M5B 1X9 or contribute on line at http://www.lifesite.net/contribute/lifesite/