#226298 - 12/07/2004 14:16
Re: gay marriage
[Re: djc]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
I have a very direct interest in this situation. The lives of me, my partner, and our collective family are directly impacted. It's personal, and I take it very personally when people who have no direct stake in the issue want to use their religious beliefs to override mine.
Dan, my last post was a response before your edit. While it still holds, I'd like to address this issue a little more personally since I've been speaking pretty generally.
If my religious beliefs are true, then whtever the law says doesn't matter much. Actually, the truth affects you even if I don't believe it. If they aren't true then you're right to ignore my concerns. The only thing that trumps religious belief is the truth.
I don't think that my beliefs should trump yours as far as the law is concenred. What the government should be interested in is making sure you and I have equal opportunity for health care, to form the relationships we find fulfilling, and persue whatever we think will make us happy. I truly believe you and I should both have all of these things.
You and I are engaged in a fundamental difference of belief where the stakes are very personal and very high. I'm guessing that my beliefs are highly offensive to you (they would be if I were in your shoes), and there's probably nothing either of us can do about that. I only hope you can understand that I truly care about your well being and don't bear you ill will.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226299 - 12/07/2004 14:32
Re: gay marriage
[Re: JeffS]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 08/08/2000
Posts: 351
Loc: chicago
|
Jeff, Quote:
I'm guessing that my beliefs are highly offensive to you (they would be if I were in your shoes)
Actually, no. I don't get offended by opinions such as yours. In reality, I think we agree on just about everything, once we get past the question of morality of gay relationships. I don't waste time worrying about peoples opinions on that anymore. Life is too short to worry about how other people think or feel. Ultimately, the only way to change minds on the topic is to live your life the best way you can, and to demonstrate that preconceptions often have no basis in reality.
I fully support our respective rights to disagree regarding the morality of gay marriage, and to subscribe (or not) to a faith in harmony with our own morals and values. I also agree that the government should regulate unions between same-sex or opposite-sex couples identically, whether referred to as marriage or not. And we also agree that the FMA is not the right approach to solving any of these questions.
I have no issue with you or your beliefs at all. It's the people who want to write discriminating constitutional amendments that I have a problem with.
--Dan.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226300 - 12/07/2004 14:39
Re: gay marriage
[Re: JeffS]
|
addict
Registered: 23/09/2000
Posts: 498
Loc: Virginia, USA
|
Quote:
Nope. I prefer the law to stay neuteral on the issue, which is what I'm advocating. I'm saying the law should neither deny or allow gay marriage.
I'm confused. Does this mean you do or don't think homesexuals should be allowed to legally marry?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226301 - 12/07/2004 15:16
Re: gay marriage
[Re: Dylan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
I think we should get rid of the legal concept of marriage altogether. Which isn't going to happen, of course, so then I support Civil Unions as the next best step. It's unsatisfactory across the boards, but it gives homosexuals the legal rights that come with marriage and keeps from redifining something many religious institutions hold sacred.
edited to take the foot out of my mouth on a certain word usage. . . 
Edited by FerretBoy (12/07/2004 15:19)
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226302 - 12/07/2004 15:20
Re: gay marriage
[Re: JeffS]
|
addict
Registered: 23/09/2000
Posts: 498
Loc: Virginia, USA
|
In theory, I agree. But those options aren't available today. Do you think that a homesexual couple should be allowed this afternoon to get a marriage license?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226303 - 12/07/2004 15:29
Re: gay marriage
[Re: Dylan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
I'm not sure what you're asking. Right now (if I understand things correctly) homosexuals aren't legally able to marry. It takes time to change things legally, so exploring options like Civil Unions, redifining marriage, or abolish legal marriages altogether are all we really have to talk about.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226304 - 12/07/2004 17:57
Re: gay marriage
[Re: mwest]
|
old hand
Registered: 17/07/2001
Posts: 721
Loc: Boston, MA USA
|
Ugh.
Didn't we have this discussion months ago? Seriously I don't understand what the big deal is. Who does this hurt? There are NO victims. The amendment that is being proposed would be the first to TAKE AWAY people's rights, that's just plain wrong.
I live in Massachusetts and my lesbian aunt was married on May 17th, as soon as the vows were completed, a huge bolt of lightning came down from the clear blue sky and smote her on the spot. Oh wait, nope that didn't happen.
Trust me, Jesus didn't give a fuck who she married. So why do you care what she does with her life?
Spend more time worrying about your own life, not everyone else's.
Edited by ithoughti (12/07/2004 18:06)
_________________________
---------
//matt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226305 - 12/07/2004 18:00
Re: gay marriage
[Re: ithoughti]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4181
Loc: Cambridge, England
|
Quote:
smoted
Smite, smote, smitten. Not smoted. Where did you go to wotansday school? 
Peter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226306 - 12/07/2004 18:02
Re: gay marriage
[Re: peter]
|
old hand
Registered: 17/07/2001
Posts: 721
Loc: Boston, MA USA
|
Quote:
Quote:
smoted
Smite, smote, smitten. Not smoted. Where did you go to wotansday school?
Peter
damnit! a rare grammar error by ithoughti.
by the way, what's wotansday school?
Edited by ithoughti (12/07/2004 18:07)
_________________________
---------
//matt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226307 - 12/07/2004 18:11
Re: gay marriage
[Re: ithoughti]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4181
Loc: Cambridge, England
|
Quote:
by the way, what's wotansday school?
Like Sunday School but with more smiting.
Peter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226308 - 12/07/2004 18:43
Re: gay marriage
[Re: ithoughti]
|
addict
Registered: 24/07/2003
Posts: 500
Loc: Colorado, N.A.
|
Quoting Dan: Quote:
Life is too short to worry about how other people think or feel.
And then:
Quote:
So why do you care what she does with her life?
My whole problem with most organized religions: They spend way too much time assessing the "healthiness" of others' lives, thoughts and feelings. Wait a minute: that's my whole problem with most government institutions, as well.
_________________________
-- DLF
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226309 - 12/07/2004 20:38
Re: gay marriage
[Re: ithoughti]
|
enthusiast
Registered: 08/08/2000
Posts: 351
Loc: chicago
|
Quote:
Didn't we have this discussion months ago?
Umm, yeah. But this time Yz33d's not here to join in. 
--Dan.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226310 - 12/07/2004 20:59
Re: gay marriage
[Re: djc]
|
old hand
Registered: 17/07/2001
Posts: 721
Loc: Boston, MA USA
|
Quote:
Quote:
Didn't we have this discussion months ago?
Umm, yeah. But this time Yz33d's not here to join in.
--Dan.
those were the days...
_________________________
---------
//matt
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226311 - 13/07/2004 02:29
Re: gay marriage
[Re: mwest]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3212
Loc: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
1. Religion has a pretty good claim as definer of marriage. Marriage is documented as a religious institution far before organized government comes on the scene.
And gay marriage is documented within some ancient religions, too, so using "marriage was defined before governement" is not an argument that can carry any weight. According to one source I've seen, the intolerance toward gay marriage coincides with the rise of Christianity in Rome.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226312 - 13/07/2004 02:35
Re: gay marriage
[Re: SuperQ]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3212
Loc: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
My girlfriend and I would probably apply for a Civil Union if it existed, we've been together for 2 years, and have no marrige plans, mostly becuase of the religious connotations.
Civil Unions do exist (for straight couples). A bit of info for Minnesota. Note the first two groups of people listed under "Who may perform a marriage ceremony?" No need for religion to play a part at all...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226313 - 13/07/2004 02:43
Re: gay marriage
[Re: JeffS]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3212
Loc: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
My marriage to my wife is NOT dependant whatsoever on what the law says. If they dissolved the concept of legal marraige entirely (which I've said before is a step I'd probably support) we'd still be very much married in every sense that we are now. I view marriage as a spiritual covenant, and that this type of covenant dates before there WAS such a thing as government. I realize that this is not a perspective we'd ever agree on
I agree with this perspective on marriage. What I don't understand, is why you believe you (or Christians in general) should be allowed to deny gay people the right to make that same spiritual covenant, if they (and their religion -- Christian or not, and not all Christian churches have an issue with gay marriage) have reconciled homosexuality within their religious framework?
If it's simply because homosexuality is sin, then feel free to cast the first stone.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226314 - 13/07/2004 02:46
Re: gay marriage
[Re: JeffS]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/07/1999
Posts: 5549
Loc: Ajijic, Mexico
|
but it still seems wrong for the state to even be involved
Well, then... how about a system of marriage where the participants can choose either state or church marriage or both, depending on their beliefs.
Choose church only marriage, and you are married forever in the eyes of God, but you forfeit all protections offered by our civil and legal systems. No familial health benefits; no community property nor child custody rights should the marriage fail.
Choose state only marriage, you get all the state protections and benefits, but at the risk of (depending on your belief system) death everlasting at the end of your corporeal existance or even burning in hell because you lived in sin with your partner.
Choose both, and get the best of both worlds.
Whose interests would be damaged by such a system?
tanstaafl.
_________________________
"There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226315 - 13/07/2004 02:50
Re: gay marriage
[Re: JeffS]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3212
Loc: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
I don't want the government to make broad pronouncements on things I believe. Those things should be left to the church.
I'd hope that you not let either make broad pronouncements on what you believe. Is there any significant difference between letting one large body pick your beliefs versus letting another large body pick them? It would be sad to think that you've let anybody, other than yourself, make that choice for you.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226316 - 13/07/2004 03:02
Re: gay marriage
[Re: JeffS]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
|
When I met tanstaafl in Fairbanks back in February he mentioned that I was missing an interesting thread on the BBS about gay marriage. I never managed to backtrack and read it and it sounds like maybe some of the same turf is being covered here. Good. I think it is worth it. Oh, and whatever my notions of separating marriage from civil law...I am not holding my breath. Changes like that would move at a glacial pace. My ashes will have been sprinkled over the stage at the downtown Deja Vu by the time marriage has been extricated from legal statutes.
Jeff: I'm guessing that my beliefs are highly offensive to you (they would be if I were in your shoes)
The civility with which deep disagreements are expressed is something that continues to set this BBS apart. I may be one of the least polite folks here in that regard, but it is gratifying to see others express themselves so calmly.
Jeff, I will challenge you in a moment, but I suppose I should insert the usual qualifiers first. I think that there are people whose sexual affinity is weak, indeterminate and/or negotiable. I'll admit that there are maybe a few folks who repented of being homosexual, forced themselves back to straightness, and who are happy and back where they belong (you may imply from my phrasing that I am guessing that there are a lot of these converts who are unhappy and repressed).
While I have since converted to a practiceing Isexual, I can say that I *knew* that I was a heterosexual by about the age of 10. No question.
Jeff: I don't think it's right that a gay couple should not receive benifits because they made a choice. The choice, I believe, is an unhealthy one, but that doesn't need to be augmented by the state.
What you write here, with respect to "choice" sounds very, very familiar. I hope it is not insulting to say it sounds like a "party line" but it really does.
I can't say "some of my best friends are gay" because as it happens that isn't the case. I do know a hell of a lot of gay people and have worked and continue to work with many...and I guess I have paid attention to what non-heterosexual folks have to say about their situation. Anyhow, this notion of "made a choice" just flys in the face of reality. When Jim was figuring out that he liked girls at age 11, his classmate Charlie (not his real name) was figuring out in the strongest terms that he liked boys a *lot* better. Frankly, when bazillions of people like Charlie say "I knew I was gay at age 11" and the response is "no, you made a choice and a choice that is unhealthy", I think that is very disrespectful to Charlie and no amount of "but we care about you" really erases that.
Good grief I don't know why I am the one making this point when there are probably folks much more qualified to so, but....
Jeff, I *strongly* challenge you to reexamine this notion of "made a choice" -- take some active steps to examine its validity. What to do? March into gay bars in San Antonio? Interview patrons? Maybe this challenge is insulting in and of itself. Maybe you have done all that, but what you suggest in the notion of "choice" just doesn't square with any reality I have encountered.
'Course my reality...well.....
_________________________
Jim
'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226317 - 13/07/2004 03:35
Re: gay marriage
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/07/1999
Posts: 5549
Loc: Ajijic, Mexico
|
I *strongly* challenge you to reexamine this notion of "made a choice"
I would like to amplify just a bit what Jim has said here.
Jeff, if you really feel that homosexuality is a choice, consider this: What conceivable inducement could I offer you that would persuade you to "choose " to find another male sexually attractive? Even if I were empowered to offer you the one thing you desire more than anything else in the world, i.e., an absolute guarantee of life everlasting in God's kingdom if you could make that "choice", and at the same time promise you the torments of Hell if you couldn't... you would not be able to do so.
Is it such a leap to believe that homosexuals would find the converse to those "choices" just as repugnant and impossible?
Think about it...
Aside: What a fantastic community we have on this bbs, to be able to engage in a "hot topic" discussion like this and retain friendliness and civility throughout. I truly believe that for a group our size, we are unique on the world wide web.
tanstaafl.
_________________________
"There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226318 - 13/07/2004 07:37
Re: gay marriage
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4181
Loc: Cambridge, England
|
Quote:
When I met tanstaafl in Fairbanks back in February he mentioned that I was missing an interesting thread on the BBS about gay marriage.
Over here. It was a good'un.
Peter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226321 - 13/07/2004 12:11
Re: gay marriage
[Re: Cybjorg]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4181
Loc: Cambridge, England
|
Quote:
In light of the subject, here is a thought-provoking article from a fundamentalist magazine that I subscribe to.
With what point? That because one person (with a tragically damaged childhood) has been confused enough about his sexuality to bat for both teams during the course of his life, that therefore all gays are abuse victims who could be batting for the other team? Is that what passes for logic in fundamentalist magazines?
Peter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226322 - 13/07/2004 12:26
Gay Marriage & Christianity
[Re: tanstaafl.]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Disclaimer: this discussion is moving beyond the legal issues surrounding gay marriage and focusing on my personal beliefs. This is important to say because my views on legal marriage and Christian marriage are different. Also, when I say "Christianity", I recognize that I am speaking about a specific set of beliefs that are not held by all organizations who use the title. I hold to the teachings of what I call "Evangelical" Christianity, which affirms the orthodox teachings of the church and recognizes the bible as the only infallible standard of truth. I just want to make it clear where I'm coming from, because there are plenty of churches (like my mother's) with differing views on homosexual marriages. To start with, I have two basic premises that guide my beliefs about homosexual marriage: 1) Christianity is true. 2) Christianity teaches that homosexual acts are sin. For me to agree that homosexual acts are not sin, one or both of the preceding statements would have to be disproved to me. So while we can talk about the nature of choice (which I think it will be beneficial), ultimately my beliefs stem from what I think God teaches. Now to your question: Quote:
Jeff, if you really feel that homosexuality is a choice, consider this: What conceivable inducement could I offer you that would persuade you to "choose " to find another male sexually attractive? Even if I were empowered to offer you the one thing you desire more than anything else in the world, i.e., an absolute guarantee of life everlasting in God's kingdom if you could make that "choice", and at the same time promise you the torments of Hell if you couldn't... you would not be able to do so.
First off, I don’t believe that “going straight” has gotten anyone entrance into heaven. The bible is crystal clear that heaven is given to people on the basis of faith alone; i.e.: that they trust in the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ as the solution to their sin problem. Yes homosexual acts are sin from a biblical perspective, but so is lying, lust, cheating, stealing, drunkenness, gluttony, promiscuity, and an endless list of other things. Because of Christ’s death on the cross, none of this is strong enough to keep anyone out of heaven including those who peform homosexual acts. Understand that I am as guilty as anyone else here and commit sin on a daily basis- some sin which I know to be wrong and other sin that I have misunderstood. I am incapable of keeping myself pure of sin, though God has released me in some areas and continues to work in me for others. It is only in the grace and forgiveness of God I have hope, for I have demonstrated my failure at righteousness time and time again.
The bottom line: it is no easy task to struggle against our sin nature. I did not have sex before I was married, and that was a constant struggle, especially during the time in which I was engaged and I knew my fiancée and I would be together that way in only a few (very long) months. Most of you do not consider this an issue, but for us it was and it was not an easy thing. But that was one area in which I had success- by the grace of God. In many others I have fallen short, but even in the struggle I honor God by recognizing I am not who I need to be and must be renewed by His continuing grace.
And please note: I haven’t said that homosexuality is a choice, though I did say homosexual marriage is a choice. I’m not completely conceding the former, but I find it likely that homosexuality isn’t a choice. We live in a fallen world where creation is not what it is meant to be. In a perfect world I would not struggle with lust, pride, or any of the other sins that plague me. To answer Doug’s question before he asks it (because we’ve had this discussion before), there was never a time I chose to be heterosexual; I just was. But knowing that I liked women was a different thing than sleeping with them. My choice before marriage was not to have sex, and that was a choice I had to make over and over. Even now, not lusting after women who are not my wife is a choice I have to make again and again.
Part of the Christian life is to struggle with sin. This glorifies God because it shows our love and devotion to Him. Ultimately those who trust in Christ will be healed of our sins and inequities so we can spend eternity as we were meant to: in a sinless, love relationship with our Creator. For now we live in a fallen world where we struggle with sin, disease, war, death, and all things that make this life a dim shadow of what is to come. But a lifetime is miniscule in comparison to the eternity that the Christian faith looks toward.
Could I find men sexually attractive to please God? Not without his help for sure. But if that were what he required His grace would be sufficient to cover me. All that I could to would be to have faith and struggle.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226323 - 13/07/2004 12:37
Re: gay marriage
[Re: jimhogan]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
The civility with which deep disagreements are expressed is something that continues to set this BBS apart.
Amen. I keep waiting for this thread to get locked due to the sensitive and personal nature of what we're discussing, but it never does because most people post with respect and restraint. I am truly grateful to those of you who tolerate different ideas (especially mine) because it's certainly been a benifit to me. If you were to go back and read all of my posts (which I don't recommend!), you'd see that many of my ideas have changed- many times because of a better understanding of outside viewpoints. Not that any of us will ever be on the same page, but at least we're better educated.
This is one of the most tolerant places to exchange ideas in the world and that's something I value immensly. People are respected here, even when their ideas are not.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226324 - 13/07/2004 13:44
Re: gay marriage
[Re: peter]
|
addict
Registered: 23/12/2002
Posts: 652
Loc: Winston Salem, NC
|
Quote:
With what point? That because one person (with a tragically damaged childhood) has been confused enough about his sexuality to bat for both teams during the course of his life, that therefore all gays are abuse victims who could be batting for the other team? Is that what passes for logic in fundamentalist magazines?
Rather an article from an "insider's perspective" who claims that his homosexual lifestyle was a destructive choice. He also claims that the "tolerance" and "freedom" doors don't often swing both ways.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226325 - 13/07/2004 13:58
Re: gay marriage
[Re: Cybjorg]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4181
Loc: Cambridge, England
|
Quote:
Rather an article from an "insider's perspective" who claims that his homosexual lifestyle was a destructive choice.
Yes, it certainly sounds as if he's happier now. Which is good -- but tells us nothing about any other person. It wouldn't be hard to dig up inverse stories, about people feeling relief and wholeness after having finally walked out of hetero relationships based on pretence or on self-denial.
Quote:
He also claims that the "tolerance" and "freedom" doors don't often swing both ways.
Is tolerance of intolerance a virtue? Is intolerance of intolerance a vice? Not that it's valid in the first place to judge a viewpoint by the behaviour of a very few of its adherents. Every movement has its nutters.
Peter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226326 - 13/07/2004 14:27
Re: Gay Marriage & Christianity
[Re: JeffS]
|
addict
Registered: 23/09/2000
Posts: 498
Loc: Virginia, USA
|
Quote:
1) Christianity is true.
2) Christianity teaches that homosexual acts are sin.
For me to agree that homosexual acts are not sin, one or both of the preceding statements would have to be disproved to me
When were the above statements proven to be true to you? As an athiest, this is something that I don't understand. If you show me a book written by some guys a couple of thousand years ago, I feel the burdon of proof is obviously on you to demonstrate the book is true - not the other way around.
BTW, I do want to say I appreciate your thoughtful responses in a thread where you are being ganged up on. I've had similar discussions with two different evangelical Christians recently and I've gained a much better understanding from you then I did from them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#226327 - 13/07/2004 14:35
Re: gay marriage
[Re: peter]
|
addict
Registered: 23/12/2002
Posts: 652
Loc: Winston Salem, NC
|
Quote:
Not that it's valid in the first place to judge a viewpoint by the behaviour of a very few of its adherents. Every movement has its nutters.
Agreed. Since the definition of intolerance is "unwillingness to recognize and respect differences in opinions or beliefs", it seems that both sides suffer here. I don't forsee much of a middle ground on the road ahead.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index