• 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!

[W:422] So, marriage is destroyed, right?

IMO, it's better for everyone involved to not make your sexual preference part of your public persona. I don't make it a point to talk about sex with Wife or the fact we are straight in public. Why do Gays feel it's necessary?

I won't go back through 42 pages of posts, but didn't you say when asked you kiss your wife in public?

Doesn't matter - going to dinner with her is to announce you are straight. When you go to a show together, and parties together, and do 100 things married couples do together, you're announcing you're a heterosexual couple. I don't know if you're on Facebook, but the few times I go online, my married friends SCREAM that they're a heterosexual couple, with pictures of themselves and their kids together. Same with their Christmas cards - always photos of them with kids or just of the kids. When my wife leaves on a plane, we kiss each other goodbye.

And IME with all my brother's friends, dozens of interactions, street parties, house parties, Thanksgiving, and more, that's how they act. I've never once heard a conversation about gay SEX with them. They are people, who are gay. That's it. They just don't try to HIDE it.

And if some gay people announce it and gay rights are part of their concerns, that's NORMAL. What you take for granted - a baseline of assumed respect as normal citizens, at the core, which bleeds into discrimination at work, etc. - they still don't have, and wanting that is NORMAL, as is fighting for it. We've made immense progress BECAUSE people fought for it, in public. They should be applauded for it, not condemned because you'd rather not know they exist.

You might think discrimination against them is a thing of the past, but that's not true. There's a reason something like 40% of homeless kids are gay and it's because they've been forced from their homes by parents who reject them because they are gay. One friend of ours was so disowned by his parents his mother went through a year long battle with cancer and died, and he found out months after the funeral.

And the best way to make progress is how it's happening with you, to be honest. You have a great friend, and he'd been that for a long time I assume. You find out he's gay, and.....nothing about him changed, but that he's gay. You're to be commended for keeping him as a friend, but what you've learned is being gay is as far as you're concerned not all that big a deal. He's still a great guy, and you welcome him in your life.

Now do that million times, with a million gay people, who have millions of coworkers, family and friends, and you've got a change in society. You can't be bigoted against a guy you KNOW is a really good person, so him being gay becomes a thing, like he's fat or skinny or short. That's how it should be and being open about his sexual preference will do more than any protest for changing minds.
 
Last edited:
Why not? It worked well for most of our history.

Yeah, and I guess we should bring back slavery, while we're at it. Get rid of women's rights too. Only straight, white, male, land owners should have power. :roll:

Just because that's how society worked in the past, does not make that a good thing. There's a lot of screwed up stuff that happened in society, but we've overcome a lot of that, stuff like removing racist policies, protecting women's rights, etc.
 
Why not? It worked well for most of our history.

And for most of our history, gays suffered from open and state-sanctioned discrimination. Being in the closet "worked well" to sustain that kind of discrimination.

Gay sex was a crime in some states until Lawrence v. Texas in 2002. If you want to return to that era, and open, state-sponsored discrimination against people for the simple reason they ARE gay, you should say so and we'll know from what perspective you're making that argument.
 
Why not? It worked well for most of our history.

It may have worked well for illiterate homophobic bigots. Not so well for good people who happened to be just another minority.
 
Why not? It worked well for most of our history.

It worked well for straights maybe. Slavery also worked for white people, not black people. Just because it worked well for YOU or MOST doesn't mean it is right and just.
 
For years, Republicans ran against gay marriage equality - they used the issue to get Republican voters out.

The message from the activists and practically all Republican politicians was the same: gay marriage marriage equality would destroy the institution of marriage. If you liked marriage, if you liked children, you had to protect marriage by opposing gay marriage equality.

It's interesting to review this as a typical example of a Republican politicization of an issue, now that we have some more history.

I considered pulling up a long list of quotes, but I'll stick with the Republican Senate Majority leader as typical: "Will activist judges not elected by the American people destroy the institution of marriage, or will the people protect marriage as the best way to raise children? My vote is with the people."

That's what he said when Bush's effort to pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting gay marriage failed to get the 60 required votes. Republicans voted 45-6 in favor of the amendment - support for banning gay marriage in the constitution had overwhelming Republican support int he Senate and elsewhere.

So, how are those claims of nearly the entire party holding up now, that the institution of marriage would be destroyed, made so loudly for so many years? It'd be nice if Republicans voters could learn a little something from examples like this about the false, misguided hyperbole the Republican leaders to get votes.

All humans, especially Americans it seems, have very selective amnesia. I think it's related to cognitive dissonance and denial.

If the suggestion is that conventional marriage makes a society moral, that claim is blown out of the water by the many immoral actions of the government of this supposedly moral country.
 
So? All children are innocent of any sins. Only adults can sin. Including those who commit homosexual acts.

There is no 'god' and therefore no 'sin'. As for your nonsense about children being 'innocent', tell that to the family of two year-old James Bulger, kidnapped, tortured and bludgeoned to death by two 10 year-old children:

Murder of James Bulger - Wikipedia

So where does that leave your infallible bible?
 
Last edited:
That isn't in the New Testament. Thus it doesn't apply to Christians in any way.

So explain why my christian bible contains both new and old testaments if the OT doesn't apply to christians. Sorry, but that excuse ain't going to hold water.
 
So explain why my christian bible contains both new and old testaments if the OT doesn't apply to christians. Sorry, but that excuse ain't going to hold water.

You do not believe the Bible anyway so you are completely unworthy of any response on that basis.

Get lost.
 
You do not believe the Bible anyway so you are completely unworthy of any response on that basis.

Get lost.

Aw, did I hurt your feelings? No, I believe your idiotic book of conjuring tricks about as much as I believe Harry Potter is an actual wizard. Also, you have still failed to answer why my bible contains both the OT and NT if the former is irrelevant as was claimed. No surprise; nicely avoided.
 
Straight people in general talk about their relationships openly, and don't have to worry about having to hide that fact for fear of discrimination. But if we do the exact same thing, it's "making gay our persona". It's a ridiculous take.

:applaud :ind: :applaud

Soooooooooooooooooooooooo true and the fundie hypocrites cannot see it...it's that giant 'mote' in their eye. They dont 'want' to hear/see it, so it's offensive in others.
 
I think you're looking for 'judgement' with that particular scripture. Bigotry is disagreement and hypocrisy is not following thru with your stated beliefs.


Christ wants everyone to follow the Word and the Word includes laws. "man shall not lie with man....It is an abomination".

The Word is this Message: forgiveness, compassion, brotherly love, peace.

Any stories or 'laws' written by man in the Bible that conflict with this are "man's error" and not God's Word.
 
The Word is this Message: forgiveness, compassion, brotherly love, peace.

You can't have "forgiveness" unless there are sins to forgive. And the New Testament clearly lays out a long list of sins. Homosexuality being one of many.
 
There were health reasons associated with those laws during the time they were issued.

And there were stupid homophobic biases associated with gays during the time it was written. We NOW KNOW there is no harm in gay relationships. None at all. If there is/are...what are they?

That's what this thread is about...what harm as gay marriage brought after a few years now? NONE.
 
You'll never convince a zealot, hiding behind 'god', that they are wrong. Bigotry is easy when your 'god' says something is wrong.

It's not called 'blind faith' for nuthin' They are fully indoctrinated with their dogma. Catholicism is esp. a cult.
 
Why not? It worked well for most of our history.

That's the same as saying slavery worked for African-Americans for 'most of our history.'

Your post is disgusting and hateful and the opposite of "Christian."
 
You do not believe the Bible anyway so you are completely unworthy of any response on that basis.

Get lost.

I do. I am a Christian and his question was very valid. Please answer it:

So explain why my christian bible contains both new and old testaments if the OT doesn't apply to christians. Sorry, but that excuse ain't going to hold water.
 
You can't have "forgiveness" unless there are sins to forgive. And the New Testament clearly lays out a long list of sins. Homosexuality being one of many.

And so dishonest of you (another sin, I hope you repent) to cut out the part of my post that explained that...and that you cannot:

The Word is this Message: forgiveness, compassion, brotherly love, peace.

Any stories or 'laws' written by man in the Bible that conflict with this are "man's error" and not God's Word.
 
Back
Top Bottom