• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Chicken Lips Are Scarce: Great Gay Kiss-Off Lays a Gigantic Egg

Are you sure? They do have to get building permits and business licenses in order to operate.

Right, and the mayors of those cities won't be able to stop them from getting a permit.
 
Last edited:
Let's hope not anyway.

They can't do it openly, that's for sure.

Well yeah, they are some corrupt mother effers, Rahm especially, so who knows. I meant legally and legitimately they can't stop them from opening up in their cities.
 
But, Christians have always been against gay marriage. They follow the Bible, and the Bible says that gay marriage is wrong. That's not a 'twisted' version of Christianity, that is Christianity. No one is going to change those peoples' minds, so you may as well get used to it.

Actually that is the Old Testament. For Christianity, we should listen to what the Christ said. What he said, is love your neighbor as you do yourself.
 
Actually that is the Old Testament. For Christianity, we should listen to what the Christ said. What he said, is love your neighbor as you do yourself.

Try telling that to Christians and convincing them to accept gay marriage. It won't work. Even Obama is anti-gay marriage. He just recently said that he supports it to gain a few votes, but everyone knows that he wasn't sincere.
 
Try telling that to Christians and convincing them to accept gay marriage. It won't work. Even Obama is anti-gay marriage. He just recently said that he supports it to gain a few votes, but everyone knows that he wasn't sincere.

Well most Christians, like most of all 'groups', are stupid. Its why I don't bother going to Church.
 
Well most Christians, like most of all 'groups', are stupid. Its why I don't bother going to Church.

And nor do I, and that's our right. But multiple millions of people in this country are Christians and do go to church and are against gay marriage. That is their right as well, and no one is going to change their minds.
 
Actually that is the Old Testament. For Christianity, we should listen to what the Christ said. What he said, is love your neighbor as you do yourself.
You are incorrect sir. Christ said love thy neighbor, that doesnt mean we love their sin. Just as I wouldn't expect another Christian to love my sin. I do not believe the gov't should dictate whether homosexuals can be married or not because that, in turn, allows the gov't to sink its claws into something else. However, I also believe gay marriage is wrong. This is due to the fact that I am a Christian and the Bible says it is. That doesn't make me better than a gay person. God will condemn someone for stealing, murder, lying, etc just as quickly as homosexuality if they do not repent and allow God to come into their life and change them. Be that as it may, if you read below, nothing is said of wives or husbands, be subject to your own husband or wife. It says wives and husbands.
Ephesians 5:21-31
21 and be subject to one another in the fear of Christ. 22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her; 26 that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless. 28 So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; 29 for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, 30 because we are members of His body. 31 For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh
 
Ephesians 5:21-31
21 and be subject to one another in the fear of Christ. 22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her; 26 that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless. 28 So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; 29 for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, 30 because we are members of His body. 31 For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh

This says nothing about homosexuality at all. Neither condemning it nor condoning it...or even neutral on it. It just says nothing about it period.

It does however talk about how the woman is subject to the man. And the funny thing about this passage is that I never hear about it any other conversation that does not talk about SSM. Unless of course it comes from some nutzoid that even a great majority of Christians agree is a nutzoid.
 
In the grand scheme of things, if a couple of pooter-pokers or slit-slappers want to get married, they should be allowed to, but it's really such an unimportant issue. I'd like to see issues that actually matter in the front page news.
 
Last edited:
This says nothing about homosexuality at all. Neither condemning it nor condoning it...or even neutral on it. It just says nothing about it period.

It does however talk about how the woman is subject to the man. And the funny thing about this passage is that I never hear about it any other conversation that does not talk about SSM. Unless of course it comes from some nutzoid that even a great majority of Christians agree is a nutzoid.
What it says is that marriage is between a man and a woman. The point being contended is that marriage was defined in the Old Testament and, seeing as how it was in the Old Testament, it does not apply to us. Ephesians is a New Testament book, therefore, his point was incorrect. Anything else or are you going to continue to argue with your emotions instead of facts?
 
In the grand scheme of things, if a couple of pooter-pokers or slit-slappers want to get married, they should be allowed to, but it's really such an unimportant issue. I'd like to see issues that actually matter in the front page news.

Agreed. They're Americans just like us. They should have the same rights as everyone else.
 
What it says is that marriage is between a man and a woman. The point being contended is that marriage was defined in the Old Testament and, seeing as how it was in the Old Testament, it does not apply to us. Ephesians is a New Testament book, therefore, his point was incorrect. Anything else or are you going to continue to argue with your emotions instead of facts?

Since you brought it up, this is what it says in the bible about marriage.

306784_412416635461216_386210129_n.jpg


Please explain why you only embrace one "tradition" and not all of them?

BTW - I never got my goats from my father-in-law and my wife wasn't a virgin and we forgot to stone her. What do you say about those traditions?
 
Since you brought it up, this is what it says in the bible about marriage.

306784_412416635461216_386210129_n.jpg


Please explain why you only embrace one "tradition" and not all of them?

BTW - I never got my goats from my father-in-law and my wife wasn't a virgin and we forgot to stone her. What do you say about those traditions?

Well, the Bible doesn't specify that anyone needs to get their goats from their father in law, or what the punishment should absolutely be (or that there should even be a punishment) for a woman not being a virgin. But the Bible does specifically say that marriage is between a man and a woman.

I'm not taking sides either way. That's just the facts.
 
What it says is that marriage is between a man and a woman. The point being contended is that marriage was defined in the Old Testament and, seeing as how it was in the Old Testament, it does not apply to us. Ephesians is a New Testament book, therefore, his point was incorrect. Anything else or are you going to continue to argue with your emotions instead of facts?

No it doesn't. It just says that wifes are subject to their husbands. Thats ALL that it says and thats all that it was talking about. Remember, this was at a time that women were nothing more than property. Considered less than a man. The people that wrote the bible wanted to reinforce that.

And I'm not the one that is talking with my emotions. I just think that if someone is going to quote the bible then they should get its instructions correct instead of using it to advance their goals. Doing so disrespects God.
 
No it doesn't. It just says that wifes are subject to their husbands. Thats ALL that it says and thats all that it was talking about. Remember, this was at a time that women were nothing more than property. Considered less than a man. The people that wrote the bible wanted to reinforce that.

And I'm not the one that is talking with my emotions. I just think that if someone is going to quote the bible then they should get its instructions correct instead of using it to advance their goals. Doing so disrespects God.

My issue is this. If God endorsed gay marriage, if He has no problem with it, why is it that throughout the entire Bible marriage is referred to as husband and wife? That's the point of my post. If God intended for marriage to be between whomever we wanted, He would not have had instructions on marriage be sex specific. No emotion there. Those are facts.
 
Since you brought it up, this is what it says in the bible about marriage.

306784_412416635461216_386210129_n.jpg


Please explain why you only embrace one "tradition" and not all of them?

BTW - I never got my goats from my father-in-law and my wife wasn't a virgin and we forgot to stone her. What do you say about those traditions?

Marriage must be in the same faith- What's wrong with that? God wants Christians to marry other Christians. Whats the issue with that? BTW, God doesn't condemn all marriages where both people are not Christians. I am living proof. My wife was not a Christian when we married. Now she is. And I believe that's exactly how God intended it.

Subordinate wife/proof of virginity- Well, first of all, you mixed two books from different testaments. First, subordinate. When God says subordinate, it doesn't mean the wife is the husbands slave. It means, for instance, that the ultimate decision (after having discussed it with his wife) is the husbands. Again, there is nothing wrong with that. My wife and I are best friends. I don't treat her like a slave at all. We make decisions together. Anyone in a leadership position, who is a good leader, will tell you that soliciting input from "subordinates" is one of the most important things you do as a leader. Also, any good leader will tell you that as a leader, you serve your subordinates. A good leader doesn't believe that his subordinates exist to serve him, he is there to serve them and make their life better. Much like the example Jesus sets for us. Now, proof of virginity. God uses symbolism throughout the Bible. Such as when Jesus was allowed to be tempted. He knew Jesus would not succumb to the temptation. So why was it done? So that no human could ever say, "Jesus didn't go through what I have." What you didn't read was that it took 2-3 witnesses to convict someone of a crime back then. God knew that. Do you really believe that 2 or 3 people would see a woman losing her virginity? No, they wouldn't. Unless it was rape and that's a different story all together.
Marriages should be arranged- Cite the verse.
Marrying a brother- This was done for a couple of reasons. A) The world was not fully populated. People have to have sex to do that last time I checked. B) The husband needed an heir to his estate. That was important in those days. Why, I don't know and neither do you. C) A widow was a easy target for marauders and bad people in general back then.
Faults of men of God- Are you perfect? No, you're not. Neither am I. Neither were they. The only perfect man to walk the earth was Jesus. Any man God blesses is blessed despite that persons faults, not because of them.
 
I still didn't get those goats from my father in law.
I'll just make up for the lack by taking on a couple more concubines.
 
My issue is this. If God endorsed gay marriage, if He has no problem with it, why is it that throughout the entire Bible marriage is referred to as husband and wife? That's the point of my post. If God intended for marriage to be between whomever we wanted, He would not have had instructions on marriage be sex specific. No emotion there. Those are facts.

It wasn't mentioned for the simple fact that it wasn't noteworthy? The people that wrote the bible were more concerned with property and things that shouldn't be done than anything else. In the old testament there were more things about what NOT to do and things regarding property than there was of anything else.

Now knowing this the better question to ask would be "If God had such a problem with SSM then why doesn't the Bible specifically talk about it in order to forbid it?"
 
Gays aren’t deprived of any rights afforded to straights. This is a fact gay rights people refuse to admit. If Gays want to be treated as “special people” they should ask for special treatment in society before the demand it under the law.
 
Gays aren’t deprived of any rights afforded to straights. This is a fact gay rights people refuse to admit. If Gays want to be treated as “special people” they should ask for special treatment in society before the demand it under the law.

What special treatment are they asking for under the law?
 
What special treatment are they asking for under the law?

None, really. If SSM becomes a reality, then heteros could presumably marry their own gender as well. There would be no reason to do so, they most likely wouldn't, but they would have that right.

Just as gays currently have the right to engage in heterosexual marriage. They generally don't, have to deny their own sexuality to do so, and such marriages generally end in divorce.

But, they do have a right to try to deny what they are.
 
None, really. If SSM becomes a reality, then heteros could presumably marry their own gender as well. There would be no reason to do so, they most likely wouldn't, but they would have that right.

Just as gays currently have the right to engage in heterosexual marriage. They generally don't, have to deny their own sexuality to do so, and such marriages generally end in divorce.

But, they do have a right to try to deny what they are.

The difference being that hetero's are allowed to marry someone that they would naturally be with due to their heterosexual dispensation. Homosexuals are not allowed to. That makes it uneven.
 
Back
Top Bottom