Using The Bible to Argue Against Gay Rights is a Crock.

[The Roid Rage]

Look, it's useless to try and argue in any way that two guys wanting to plug each other is somehow not right, odd, immoral, or otherwise. According to these people it's totally normal and there is nothing at all wrong with it. The quicker you learn to not give a shit about your own beliefs and not say a word, the quicker you will see that the flames don't rise to consume you. I think it's a load of shit, and really that it's wrong the way people get attacked for saying anything against homosexuality. If it's all fine and well, and nothing is wrong with it, and in fact there's something wrong with you if you don't like it, that why shouldn't everyone be gay? After all it's not like we need to reproduce the traditional way with the advances in the real God here, Science.

If it were so innocent, so moral and so just you wouldn't have to defend it, but you do, through any means necessary which is the really sad part. You are so willing and eager to try and justify it that you are willing to be hateful, rude, and disrespectful to people and their religion, blind to the fact that you are doing to them what you accuse them of doing to the people you think you are defending. Still, I don't hear anyone chiming in talking about how much they love their homosexual love life. That's no ones business though until it's time to hate on The Bible or Christianity yet again. Could that have anything to do with the fact that Homosexuals have a higher suicide rate than any other group? Of course not as these people will tell you, that's all because of us evil Christians beating them down by having nothing to do with them. It has nothing to do with that being a self destructive lifestyle or anything apparently. It's has become a misguided pop culture phenomenon as it seems to just hate anything that requires you to look at you and face yourself and your actions and take responsibility for them, or embrace something greater than yourself like God or teachings from that God.

I think most of you people who are so cynical about God, Religion, and Christianity specifically need to get in touch with God somehow because you seem very devoid of love. It shows in the way you approach things like this as if it's no big deal even though we are talking about peoples lives and livelihood as a result of their choices which you simply don't care about. Well, I can understand how many of you may be beat down and hopeless enough to not give a shit about people in general but my Christianity that you like to mock and tear down so much teaches me to love all people regardless of what or who they are. I don't have to like what they do, but I do need to love them. I've never said an unkind word to any homosexual, never treated any of them I have ever known any differently than anyone else, and actually had friends who were gay who I cared very much for both male and female. It doesn't mean I have to condone what they do, that's another part of their life I stay out of. The bottom line here is that as much as you want to demonize Christianity, tear down God, and make fun of those who believe in either or what folks like myself and other believers have is something greater than any of your science, combined wisdom or so called knowledge, we have something that you can never dominate or argue and that is Faith. My faith gives me more than any of your arguments can give you, and that's peace. The thing that I think really pisses you off is the fact that folks like me are so devoted to anything and that we really do have strong beliefs we are willing to defend against all odds, while you can't find faith in anything beyond what math or science can prove to you which makes the world so small and hopeless for you because this world is all you know.

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

Ahhhh, that was a good laugh (The entire thread i mean, not just Game Rage's last post)

Yes Salv, i think we need a separate thread, because everyone's jumped on whether Gays should have rights as opposed to Doc's original point that the Bible should not be used as evidence to support a particular point of view. It just so happens that the P.O.V. that Doc has is related to Gay Rights (can't say for certain, just spitballin' or interpreting), and everyone's jumped on that instead.

I think most of the people who've ever read the Bible, is aware that it is very contradictory in nature. One set of psalms will say one thing, and then 50 pages later you get a set of psalms that say the opposite. Religious views aside, i am not going to blindly follow any text, or base an opinion on any text that contradicts itself. Otherwise it's just a collection of ideas designed to allow you to have access to all the 'facts' and interpretations there are regarding the subject matter, and therefore the decision is ultimately in your hands.

That being said, I personally have no problem with homosexuals, i have multiple gay friends, and they can do what they want. A guy starts coming on to me and i'll explain i don't swing that way, and if he's persistant, i'll rip his throat out.

'Rip his throat out, Mark of Z.E.A? Isn't that a little harsh?' Well yeah, it is. But this goes back to the whole 'choice' debate. I agree with whoever it was that said that sexual orientation is a result of natural factors and environment. I was raised in an environment that didn't really feature a great deal of homosexuality, however I did meet friends whose Dad's were very anti-gay, spread that message to their kids, who then passed it on to me, and therefore i was 'programmed' to follow a particular point of view, as all kids do, and i made a conscious decision to be straight. However, i'd still say that i didn't really choose at all. Instead i've been swayed by the other factors in my environemt, to view things a certain way and that's why i feel certain ways about certain things, even if my mind has to forcibly remind my spirit to look at things objectively.

Part of me thinks 'Fuckin' fagets!' while the rest is thinking 'Shame on me for even having that thought, they're still people for fuck sake.'

I said the same thing in the racism thread. It takes one child to repeat a biggoted remark at school, and then the whole class will believe it, and then you've got 30 odd kids who think homosexuals are filthy degenerates, despite having next to no understanding as to what it encompasses.

So i'd rip his throat out because after asking him nicely to leave me alone, this guy is still trying to have sex with me, an idea that makes me physically ill and disgusted, and that's what would cause the violent reaction, should he be foolish enough to persist. I'm straight, and i've been influenced by my surroundings to think that anything else is sacriligious and disgusting, and my mind automatically responds in that way. It's only after a few seconds that my objectivity kicks in and i'm a lot more receptive to other ideas.

So a sober Mark of Zur-En-Arrh would probably just walk away. A drunk one would rip the guys throat out, because alcohol plus objectivity doesn't usually work, in my experience.

As i said, gays can do what they want. Just don't be rubbing my face in it. Make out, dance together, hold hands, grab each others asses, but start talking about cock sucking and ring licking, and i'll just puke all over you, basically.

Should gays be allowed to marry instead or have a civil partnership? I think i'd have to agree with the guy who mentioned the fact that marriage in each religion is designed for dual sexes not just one. I've no problem with a married gay couple, i just don't think the language in typical marriage ceremonies would apply to their situation.

BUt then i don't see the point in marriage anyway. If i live with a chick for 10 years and don't marry her, and she splits, we've still got to split everything up between us. I don't honestly feel the need to put a ring on my finger to advertise to the world that i'm fully committed to the woman i love either, and declaring myself to be married to someone isn't going to amplify my love for her in any regard, so it's all a massive party to make the bride feel special and let everyone else know that you're offical in the eyes of whoever your God may be.

So if gay people want to waste a fuck load of money to get tarted up for one day and advertise their relationship status to the world, just like the rest of us, then sure why the fuck not?

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I don't agree with using Christianity for the purpose of depriving men and women of rights that should apply to all citizens of this country, no matter what their sexual orientation is. I was always taught that God loves everyone regardless of their faults and their failings, regardless of which gender they're attracted to, regardless of where they live or what they do for a living and so on and so forth. Using the argument that homosexuality is a sin is an offshoot of an argument that can be applied to just about anyone. After all, aren't we all sinners? Don't some of us sometimes take God's name in vain when we get cut off in traffic or accidentally bang our thumbs with a hammer or when we find out we're getting a tax audit? Don't some of us lust after our neighbor's wife or girlfriend or Kelly Kelly or Maryse? Don't some of us tell lies, cheat on our spouses, covet the new corvette of the guy down the street? The point is that we all sin and the Bible doesn't say that this sin is worse than that one or which sin is the least offensive or most offensive. If the Bible is used as a standard by which certain right shouldn't be afforded to some people because they commit sin, then where does that leave the rest of us? There'd be no rights for anybody if that doctrine was followed and it would be hypocritical to say otherwise. The Bible in and of itself is filled with stories, passages, etc. that contradict itself so I don't personally feel comfortable taking certain passages from it to justify prejudice against anyone.

I don't pretend to completely understand homosexuality. As a heterosexual, maybe I'm not really supposed to. I also know that it isn't my place to judge others for their behavior or how they live their lives. That's not my job, it's God's and I'm not so foolish enough to believe that I know God's will when it comes to anything. I've become much more spritual and generally religious within the past several months and I have trouble accepting that God is a bigot. I believe that God may make the lives of some more difficult as means of a test. Sometimes the test seems to be harder for some than for others. Depending upon what your beliefs are, life can be characterized as one long, continuous test that doesn't end until you stand before your maker when your time comes.

 

[ZeroVX]

Look, it's useless to try and argue in any way that two guys wanting to plug each other is somehow not right, odd, immoral, or otherwise. According to these people it's totally normal and there is nothing at all wrong with it.

That would be because there isn't. How does it affect you in any way, shape, or form if two men or two women you don't know, never could know and never will know choose to have sex with one another? No one seems to have an answer for that.

The quicker you learn to not give a shit about your own beliefs and not say a word, the quicker you will see that the flames don't rise to consume you. I think it's a load of shit, and really that it's wrong the way people get attacked for saying anything against homosexuality. If it's all fine and well, and nothing is wrong with it, and in fact there's something wrong with you if you don't like it, that why shouldn't everyone be gay?

Because it's NOT A CHOICE. That's something people don't seem to understand. There is evidence that gay and bisexual brains have different thought patterns and different chemicals in them than heterosexual brains, but people choose to flat out ignore that and scream that it's a choice, as though the louder they say it, the more true it becomes.

Here's a plan. Why don't you try to be gay? Try to force yourself to be attracted to someone of the same sex. Let me know how well it goes.

If it were so innocent, so moral and so just you wouldn't have to defend it, but you do, through any means necessary which is the really sad part. You are so willing and eager to try and justify it that you are willing to be hateful, rude, and disrespectful to people and their religion, blind to the fact that you are doing to them what you accuse them of doing to the people you think you are defending.

Intolerance breeds more intolerance. If religious groups weren't being hateful and in some cases dangerous towards a group of people that really didn't do anything to deserve that treatment, then they wouldn't be treated as backwards-thinking morons. If you want to point the finger at someone, point it at these religious fools for firing the first shot. They shouldn't dish it out if they can't take it.

Still, I don't hear anyone chiming in talking about how much they love their homosexual love life.

Well, gee, considering how people treat them, are you really surprised?

Could that have anything to do with the fact that Homosexuals have a higher suicide rate than any other group?

Again, can you blame them? When some are so scared that if they say anything about them being gay that they'll have people out their front door screaming for their head, can you really truly blame them?

Of course not as these people will tell you, that's all because of us evil Christians beating them down by having nothing to do with them.

If by "having nothing to do with them", you mean constantly saying that they're going to burn in Hell for all eternity, then yeah, that'd be right.

It has nothing to do with that being a self destructive lifestyle or anything apparently.

Thank you for fulfilling the stereotype of a religious nut. Please give some sort of proof to back this up so I can laugh at you.

It's has become a misguided pop culture phenomenon

So has being emo and wrist-cutting. Using pop culture in this is not a smart move to make.

as it seems to just hate anything that requires you to look at you and face yourself and your actions and take responsibility for them, or embrace something greater than yourself like God or teachings from that God.

The irony in this is just staggering. You say gay people need to take responsibility for people like you showering them with unwarranted hate and disgust, to the point that some are scared to leave their homes? Maybe you should take responsibility for spreading hate while claiming to be doing God's work, which is the exact opposite of the message he was trying to send.

I think most of you people who are so cynical about God, Religion, and Christianity specifically need to get in touch with God somehow because you seem very devoid of love.

More irony and hypocrisy. Shocking.

It shows in the way you approach things like this as if it's no big deal even though we are talking about peoples lives and livelihood as a result of their choices which you simply don't care about. Well, I can understand how many of you may be beat down and hopeless enough to not give a shit about people in general but my Christianity that you like to mock and tear down so much teaches me to love all people regardless of what or who they are. I don't have to like what they do, but I do need to love them.

Dear God, you are just full of hypocritical statements, aren't you?

I've never said an unkind word to any homosexual, never treated any of them I have ever known any differently than anyone else, and actually had friends who were gay who I cared very much for both male and female.

Please refer to above where you call homosexuality a "destructive lifestyle".

It doesn't mean I have to condone what they do, that's another part of their life I stay out of. The bottom line here is that as much as you want to demonize Christianity, tear down God, and make fun of those who believe in either or what folks like myself and other believers have is something greater than any of your science, combined wisdom or so called knowledge, we have something that you can never dominate or argue and that is Faith.

If what you've said in this thread is any indication of your "faith", then it's extremely misguided.

The thing that I think really pisses you off is the fact that folks like me are so devoted to anything and that we really do have strong beliefs we are willing to defend against all odds, while you can't find faith in anything beyond what math or science can prove to you which makes the world so small and hopeless for you because this world is all you know.

No, see, what pisses people off isn't that you're so devoted, it's that you're so close-minded. You refuse to accept for even a fraction of a second that you could be wrong about the Bible, Christianity, homosexuality, or anything you argue about. You ignore anything that contradicts a statement you make and just prattle on, as though the more you repeat it the more right you are. I have faith in that there is a God and that he created the world and such, but I don't need a religion to do it. Your faith has led you to believe that homosexuality is wrong, while mine has led me to the opposite, so really, what makes your faith so special?

 

[TwistofRKO]

Why bump an argument you didn't want to take part in? Why not sit in your computer chair and silently seethe to yourself?

Because I cant sit there and let obvious falsehoods pass. I said I wouldn't dive too deep into it.

Why not learn to read?

"Demean Christianity"? That's a laugh. Perhaps I demean your narrow-minded views, but I certainly don't demean Christianity by trying to spread Jesus' message of love and acceptance to the world. Maybe you didn't read the thread properly, but I am a Christian. I consider myself to be an extremely faithful and religious one, too. I do my best to follow Jesus' true message to this world, and to love all I can and to turn the other cheek to those I cannot. Obviously, I am human and therefore imperfect, and I mess up. We all mess up. But that doesn't mean I don't try.

You demean Christianity by trying to form it and the Bible around what YOU believe, instead of basing what you believe from the Bible itself. That's not how things work.

As do I, though in a different way.

One that makes ya' feeeeeeel goooood, right? Anything else would make you a lunatic of course..

Excuse me? When did I say there was nothing behind the Bible? I merely stated my opinion that it is more symbolic than literal. The Bible is supposed to be interpreted by ourselves in order to grow our faith. It is not something to take at face value.

If it was written by man, why would it be more motivational to you than a Dr. Phil book? Why would you choose to leave gaping holes in the book, the passages that are definitely written to be taken literally? The whole thing wouldn't make sense if you could just take what you want, and only what you want from it.

Um...

OK, I'm reading...

Let's see, I talked about the Greek and Hebrew translations of the Bible, and other translations, but never did I say "GOD HATES *******" was a real and legit translation. That is my interpretation of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. And so it is for my other examples. I interpret various passages in the Bible, using translations of older versions.

I refer to a piece in post #1 where you use the word "interpretations" but follow it up with "the literal translation really says..."

Life isn't a game of Mad Gab.

I don't agree with using Christianity for the purpose of depriving men and women of rights that should apply to all citizens of this country, no matter what their sexual orientation is. I was always taught that God loves everyone regardless of their faults and their failings, regardless of which gender they're attracted to, regardless of where they live or what they do for a living and so on and so forth. Using the argument that homosexuality is a sin is an offshoot of an argument that can be applied to just about anyone. After all, aren't we all sinners? Don't some of us sometimes take God's name in vain when we get cut off in traffic or accidentally bang our thumbs with a hammer or when we find out we're getting a tax audit? Don't some of us lust after our neighbor's wife or girlfriend or Kelly Kelly or Maryse? Don't some of us tell lies, cheat on our spouses, covet the new corvette of the guy down the street? The point is that we all sin and the Bible doesn't say that this sin is worse than that one or which sin is the least offensive or most offensive. If the Bible is used as a standard by which certain right shouldn't be afforded to some people because they commit sin, then where does that leave the rest of us? There'd be no rights for anybody if that doctrine was followed and it would be hypocritical to say otherwise. The Bible in and of itself is filled with stories, passages, etc. that contradict itself so I don't personally feel comfortable taking certain passages from it to justify prejudice against anyone.

I don't pretend to completely understand homosexuality. As a heterosexual, maybe I'm not really supposed to. I also know that it isn't my place to judge others for their behavior or how they live their lives. That's not my job, it's God's and I'm not so foolish enough to believe that I know God's will when it comes to anything. I've become much more spritual and generally religious within the past several months and I have trouble accepting that God is a bigot. I believe that God may make the lives of some more difficult as means of a test. Sometimes the test seems to be harder for some than for others. Depending upon what your beliefs are, life can be characterized as one long, continuous test that doesn't end until you stand before your maker when your time comes.

So you oppose a religion, that spans the entire history of mankind, because it revokes certain (possibly even immoral) rights from citizens?

Why would opposing an action mean God wouldn't love someone who violated such an action? Did your mother stop loving you after you lied about something? Why is everything ignorantly brought back to love/hate? It has nothing to do with that.

I can flip you off and push a pregnant woman down stairs, and God still loves me. Its confirmed, its a given point. However, obviously the actions aren't condoned. Of course its wrong to push a (pregnant) woman down the stairs, a horrible and despicable thing to do.

Its not hypocritical because as Christians we should never be taking the judgments into our own hands. If we apply it against what God says (through the Scriptures) then we are valid. I will agree it would be wrong for me to sit here and nitpick everything people do, but its certainly not hypocritical to acknowledge we all have flaws and deem a certain action wrong at the same time. Surely you agree pushing pregnant women down stairs is wrong. Now, since we all have flaws, admittedly so, we are rendered incapable of judging that particular action as wrong? No.

Unless anyone can present an argument without taking this beat-to-death approach, I cannot take their debate seriously.

 

[The Doctor]

Because I cant sit there and let obvious falsehoods pass. I said I wouldn't dive too deep into it.

Go full or go home. I don't want to see your stupid half-assed blah blah crap around these parts. You either man up and post exactly what you think about the actual topic being discussed or GTFO.

Why not learn to read?

Why not learn not to be a complete twat?

You demean Christianity by trying to form it and the Bible around what YOU believe, instead of basing what you believe from the Bible itself. That's not how things work.

*ahem*

If I may quote Lex Luthor...

WROOONG!!!!

I have studied the Bible a lot in my day. I have been a Christian my whole life. I have read the Bible, not cover-to-cover, but a good chunk of it. I have extracted my own life view by reading and figuring out what I think it says. By looking at the Big Picture. And I believe that what Jesus' message was is to love everyone.

EVERYONE.

As in, all people. Not "Everyone except them pesky homosexuals, black people, men named Craig, and that guy with the lazy eye who works in the cubicle next to you."

One that makes ya' feeeeeeel goooood, right? Anything else would make you a lunatic of course..

...What?

If it was written by man, why would it be more motivational to you than a Dr. Phil book?

Not sure what you're trying to say here.

The whole thing wouldn't make sense if you could just take what you want, and only what you want from it.

The whole thing doesn't make sense if looked at literally. It only makes sense if you interpret it yourself, like you're supposed to. Figure out what is symbolic and what is literal. I highly doubt that God created the Heavens and the Earth in seven days of 24 hours, for example. Religion is meant for looking inside oneself and figuring out what one believes, and we do this through study, introspection, and drawing our own conclusions.

I refer to a piece in post #1 where you use the word "interpretations" but follow it up with "the literal translation really says..."

Indeed I did. If you will reread said post, you will realize that I say what the literal translation of the original language is, and then I interpret it. You're still wrong.

Life isn't a game of Mad Gab.

I like to look at it as a game of Clue. You start out knowing very little, but as it progresses, you make little jumps and you think things through, and eventually you find the truth.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

So you oppose a religion, that spans the entire history of mankind, because it revokes certain (possibly even immoral) rights from citizens?

See, now you're trying to put words into my mouth. I can't say that I'm surprised as it's an often used tactic by those seeking to attack others that don't share their view of Christianity. In The Bible, there are passages in which it gives one the idea that owning or using slaves is permissable, and yet slavery is something that most civilized societies look upon as an abomination. Some have used words within the Bible to justify their prejudice towards those of other skin color as the Bible makes references to "mud people". Since the Bible can be interpreted as to support slavery, does that mean that the Thirteenth Amendment should be striken from the Constitution? And who is to say what's immoral? You'd agree, I assume, that being a serial murder and/or rapist is immoral, yet even those individuals are able to be legally married. Richard Ramirez, the serial killer known as the Night Stalker and a devout Satanist, is married and has been married for several years despite being incarcerated. I don't see droves of people protesting against this or working to remove his right to be in a marriage recognized under the law. Now, like most people, I'd consider 14 cold blooded murders, not to mention a slew of sexual assaults, to be immoral but it's perfectly permissable for him to marry. Is being in a relationship with a person of the same gender really in the same category of offensive?

Why would opposing an action mean God wouldn't love someone who violated such an action? Did your mother stop loving you after you lied about something? Why is everything ignorantly brought back to love/hate? It has nothing to do with that.

Hate has everything to do with it. Denying a certain group of individuals the same rights and privleges enjoyed by the rest of mainstream society because you don't like them or agree with how they live their lives is the very definition of prejudice. You obviously have something against homosexuals and you feel that, based on what you've read in the Bible, that certain rights should be withheld from them because their lifestyle offends you.

I

ts not hypocritical because as Christians we should never be taking the judgments into our own hands. If we apply it against what God says (through the Scriptures) then we are valid. I will agree it would be wrong for me to sit here and nitpick everything people do, but its certainly not hypocritical to acknowledge we all have flaws and deem a certain action wrong at the same time. Surely you agree pushing pregnant women down stairs is wrong. Now, since we all have flaws, admittedly so, we are rendered incapable of judging that particular action as wrong? No.

When it comes to judgement, didn't Jesus say while preaching the Sermon on the Mount "Judge not, lest ye' be judged"? To me, that seems to be a pretty straightforward message. As a sinner, and therefore an imperfect being, it isn't my place to condemn others, to tell them how they should live their lives, that they're deviants, that they don't have the rights to be married in a union recognized by the law. There are too many contradictions with the Bible to apply what it says to laws and policies that can affect the basic, essential rights of every man, woman and child in the United States. Unfortunately, far too many lawmakers have placed their own religious beliefs above keeping religious and state affairs separated. There are passages in the Bible that condemns homosexuality, yet God loves everyone. Even God is contradictory within the pagest of the Bible. The Old Testament paints him as a god of vengeance and jealousy while the New Testament paints him as a god of love, peace and understanding. Is God some combination of both? Is it the former? Is it the latter? Christianity is filled with so many of these infinite and unanswerable questions, so many different interpretations of Scripture and those are perfect reasons why, when it comes to deciding the rights and privleges of citizens, religion should be left out of it as much as possible. We have to muddle along through life as best as we can and it can be hard enough as it is. But denying men and women certain rights because of something you disagree with only makes it that much harder on everyone.

 

[TwistofRKO]

Do you guys need me to repeat what I just said? You completely missed the boat.

The Bible has a central theme, so if you're taking everything with your own grain of salt you're missing the boat. The Bible should filter you, not the other way around.

Christianity is not a religion. Its a relationship with God.

The Bible's stance on homosexuality has to do with morality and not with loving and hating people. I just spent the entire post explaining that to you.

Judge not, lest ye be judged, is again, something I've already covered. Keep up.

If I were to sit here and judge you, for example, saying if you like 300 you're going to Hell, because I'd be making the judgment, not God. When applying what God has to say about an issue (in its actual context) you are not the one making the judgment.

Really, I covered everything you just said, which you probably thought had great validity to it. Wrong. READ.

 

[SalvIsWin]

The Bible's stance on homosexuality has to do with morality and not with loving and hating people.

Which is exactly why we need a new thread to discuss homosexuality in a general context. The bible has contradictions, but the take home message is that homosexuality is wrong. In regards to this specific thread, I agree that using the bible to argue against gay rights is a crock, but not because there are conflicting stories or passages, rather because I would say basing that view off of faith and not logic is foolhardy.

 

[TwistofRKO]

In law-making, you're absolutely correct. When making your own moral judgments, living your daily life, faith does more for you than "what you know".

 

[SalvIsWin]

In law-making, you're absolutely correct. When making your own moral judgments, living your daily life, faith does more for you than "what you know".

Sure, absolutely agree. Every one can have their own personal opinion about whether homosexuality is immoral, of course the larger issue is that many people feel that LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) marriage infringes upon them in some way.

 

[SavageTaker]

I may be a little rusty since this is the first non-spam post I’ve made in a while but Doc, you are 1000% correct here and I completely agree with everything you’ve said in this thread.

Anyone who tries to argue that gay people shouldn’t have rights in any shape, way, or form is a close-minded cunt. Fuck you if that offends you. But when you try to argue against gay rights using religion then that’s when I really get pissed off. I have a few friends that are gay/bisexual and I consider myself gay. Yes, you read that right.

Like Doc said in his opening post, homosexuality is not a sin. Everyone should learn to love everyone regardless of their orientation, their race, sex, or anything else because we all deserve to be equal when it comes to our rights. So yes, gay people deserve to have all of the rights straight people have because they really aren’t all that different than them.

I don’t really have anything else to say on the subject at hand since everything I wanted to say has already been said but I still wanted to get that off my chest.

 

[SalvIsWin]

Not that it's a big surprise, but it's nice to have a response from someone who is gay, seeing as that is the topic at hand.

 

[The Big Gunnzbowski]

The way you perceive it. You see it as nothing more than a tool. You can manipulate it in use of promoting your own argument, yet still take it and demean Christianity.

Ummm...isn't it the intention of the reader to take away what they read as their own interpretation?

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Christianity demean homosexuals? You can't have a double standard when it comes to this type of stuff... I mean, lets be honest, it's a matter of interpretation. Just because YOU might believe something is wrong, doesn't mean I do. Personally, I don't take anything the bible says as truth. I take it as a "Moral code these people say we should live by..." And, as with anything else in this world, if I don't agree with it, I don't apply it to my everyday life or believe that it will have an everlasting effect on the quality of my life. Beliefs are opinions that are unshakable. Everybody has a right to their own, but don't try and force feed them to people how believe just as strongly in theirs as you do in yours...

Whereas, I see a book that has changed lives, one that has proven itself over and over again, has stood the test of time, and still proves right today. If there's not anything else behind it, why was it not destroyed during translation, and why would it be the most scrutinized piece of literature? None of the other man-made religious books have drawn like criticism, and no other book is known by nearly as many people.

Again, I see this statement is based on your OPINION. You say it proves right today. Maybe that's true, but only to certain people... I guess if enough people believe something is true, it's gonna survive the test of time... Hell, how many people still think Elvis is alive? Does that make it true? Religion, to me, is a pointless subject to argue about, because it's just going to boil down to what you believe vs what he believes. You believe in God...I don't...Does that make either of us wrong? Not based on our beliefs, it doesn't! To you, you're right...To me, I'm right. Stalemate. Pointless to go any further...

Using the bible to argue against ANYTHING in today's world is a crock... Being as how gay rights is the topic, I guess I'll go for it. Just because it might state in the bible that homosexuality is wrong, doesn't mean people are going to stop being gay. They're still human beings, they have preferences, they're normal people... I mean, this site is a Wrestling News site, based on Wrestling... Two semi-nude men, grabbing each other, with the goal of one getting on top of the other... Does that mean that it's wrong to like Wrestling? Or is it because they're not screwing each other that it's ok? Where's the invisible line here? I guess I just don't understand the logic behind the biblical argument, when it's applied by someone religious to attack someone Else's character. It's just plain hipocracy to me.

 

[RockFan89]

A couple of points I'd like to add (or repeat) to this discussion:

1) Gays do have equal rights. All adults (who aren't married) are allowed to get married to any other single adult of the opposite sex. There is no right a straight person has that a gay person does not. The area of concern is whether the definition of marriage should be changed.

2) The issue of gay marriage is not about who the government says you can sleep with, as the left would have you believe. Gay people already have the right to spend their life with whomever they want. It's about what type of relationships the government should give special recognition and privileges too. (A lot of problems would be solved if the government just got out of the business of marriage all together)

3) I think "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is just a silly policy. Gay people aren't joining the army to meet people, they are joining to serve their country.

4) The Bible should never be used as the basis for a legal decision in the United States, that goes totally against the first amendment. When Christianity was integrated into government in Europe centuries ago, both the countries and the religion suffered. HOWEVER, people are allowed to cast their votes based on their own morals, and if they base their morals on their faith, then that is how they will vote.

Personally, I think gay marriage should be left up to individual states to decide via a popular vote. If the legislature or courts rule in favor of gay marriage, then you have no argument against a man who wants 3 wives, or a man who wants to marry his sister, or even 2 roommates who don't even love each other but just want the tax benefits of a marriage. If you can change the definition from one man and one woman, where do you draw the line? The Courts would have to open up marriage to all sorts of relationships based on the precedent set. But if the issue is determined by the voters the precedent you set is that the people decided.

The only area of concern for me would be in the area of adoption. I firmly believe the optimal home for a child is that with a father and a mother. So if a gay couple and a traditional couple both want to adopt the same child, I think the heterosexual couple should be given preference (assuming most other things equal)

That's my two cents, and I know that I didn't stick completely to the original topic, but the discussion was just all over the place.

 

[The Insano Shiekh]

The Bible does oppose Gay Marriage. The following verses of scripture come from the King James Version, the REAL Bible.

Leviticus 18:22-

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Leviticus 20:13-

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

That's not a condemnation if homosexuals can obey. God loves all people alike, no matter if they're Christian or Athiest, Straight or Homosexual, but he's not going to accept Homosexuals. God created a Woman for a reason, not so Adam could become "homosexual." If God had really wanted to be okay with homosexuality, don't you think he would have mentioned it in the Bible with some of the prophets? That could prove a point there. And to the OP, you are completely wrong about the relationship between Ruth and Naomi. Ruth and Naomi were like a mother and daughter or like sisters, not as a couple. The story of Ruth and Naomi is meant to show that anyone can love each other, but not in an intimate way, and that's why we call our fellow Christians Brothers and Sisters in the Lord, because we love them, but not intimately, and that's why we call our family without the prefix. As a Christian, I do not hate anyone, and I can be friends with homosexuals and witness to them, but I won't just go unanswered with their morality. And what's really making me mad is that they can be ministers, and that's terrible to me. And, to the OP, I also disagree with the marriage of First Cousins, and I live in Alabama. Marriage of First Cousins and Homosexual Marriage are both abominations to Christianity, and I hope that you will study deeper into the King James Version of the Bible and let God teach you and guide you.

 

[The Insano Shiekh]

And, for more proof, here are some scriptures from the New Testament.

Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God. And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)

For this reason [idolatry] God gave them up to passions of dishonor; for even their females exchanged the natural use for that which is contrary to nature, and likewise also the males, having left the natural use of the female, were inflamed by their lust for one another, males with males, committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was fitting for their error.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

Sorry if I came late to this party. I especially want to apologize to RatedRKOFreak, with whom I would very much like to debate this point. I'm certainly game, and I hope you are too. You're in the big leagues, now, fella.

RKO, you state - quite accurately - that the book of Leviticus speaks of prohibiting male homosexuality. Depending on the version, it may or may not mention women, but that is irrelevant since the driving force behind Leviticus was to provide a "Priestly Code," and to forge expectations of a church leader by which the remainder of the congregation would follow.

But how, then, do you explain Paul's 1st letter to the Corinthians?

"Everything is permitted," you say? Maybe, but not everything is helpful. "Everything is permitted?" Maybe, but not everything is edifying. No one should be looking out for his own interests, but for those of his fellow. Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience, for the earth and everything in it belong to the Lord. If some unbeliever invites you to a meal, and you want to go, eat whatever is put in front of you without raising questions of conscience. But if someone says to you, "This meat was offered as a sacrifice," then don't eat it, out of consideration for the person who pointed it out and also for conscience's sake -

Paul directly refutes the Jewish book of Corinthians - mainly the dietary restrictions. Isn't Paul a direct follower of Jesus Christ, the Christian son of God? Would he not to be considered of authority to speak on such a subject? And would you not trust the literary integrity of a passage written, received, and translated after the birth of Jesus during one of the heights of society as opposed to the 3rd book of the Hebrew bible, "written" after the events of Genesis and Exodus?

Let me make this clear - as a fairly devout Episcopalian (oxymoron?) I generally dismiss the Old Testament as the Jewish / Christian equivalent of ancient Greek folklore. I don't trust the literacy rate, translations, adjustments to text based on wars and shifts in societal norms, etc. I have no clue when the book of Leviticus was written, expect to say that it was B.C. and a fuckton of time ago. ("fuckton" is a relatively new term of measurement in the English system of weights and measures, derived by taking 2,000 pounds or '1 ton' and multiplying it by 'fuck.')

If I were sick, I doubt I'd choose a remedy used in the book of Leviticus as opposed to going to see a doctor.

RatedRKOFreak, I do hope you (or anyone) is willing to advance this discussion with me. I'm rather into the research I am doing now.

 

[MWats]

Meh. This thread is alot of reading and I'm not that in to reading because I just don't care that much. But I'm just gonna say people are born homosexual. Obviously. Can you control who you get erections for? If one man likes his bum stretched, then so be it. If anything, I think people are afraid to give gays rights because they might start a massive overtaking of the world and rape us all. But really, you're not all that attractive, and your ass probably isn't clean enough for a gay man to conciously stick his penis inside. That being said, gays should be allowed rights, if only for the fact that instead of fucking your son or daughter, they're sticking it in the arse of their significant other.

No but seriously, gays are born gay, just as blacks are born black, whites are born white, and Asians are born with small penis.I'm sorry, I just had to make a genital joke. Shoot me.

 

[Барбоса]

King James Version, the REAL Bible

I think it is very difficult to put completely trust in any translation of either the Old or the New Testament. The former is probably 2500 years old while the latter is around 1900 years old and both have gone through numerous translations to produce the English versions used today.

Such editions and translations are also open to corruption by religious politics such as heretical controversies or schisms such as the emergence of Christianity and the rise of Protestantism that led to the King James version being printed in the 17th century so it is possible that such translations are coloured by socio-political factors.

As I stated earlier, it would be naive to think that the passage of time and countless individuals of varying levels of literacy involved in the journey from Hebrew > Aramaic > Greek > Classical Latin > Medieval Latin > Medieval English > Modern English that something might have been lost, added, downplayed or embellished, clouding our view of the original meanings of the text

 

[Soapguy]

I absolutely love that this debate is happening. It took me two sittings to get through the entire thing, but now that I have I think I'll do a little last minute chiming in without rehashing old points too much.

People who believe homosexuality is religiously wrong are unlikely to change their minds about the subject. That's just the nature of the beast, religion is just one of those things that will continue to cause arguments as long as we're alive. That section of the bible is the truth for them, usually when people find their "truths" it takes a smack in the face from God/Allah/Buddah/Vishnu/Zeus/Jupiter him/itself to take that away from them.

The same thing goes for the nature v.s. nurture argument. There could be a gene, it could be environmental, it could be whatever. Again, people are going to believe what they want to believe. As I believe it would be ideal for homosexuality to become a non-issue when I wake up in the morning, I don't think that's realistic.

Here's the thing though, I don't really think any of the stuff mentioned above should have anything to do with whether lgbtq individuals should be allowed their rights. Law isn't in place to enforce morality. It's in place to stop anarchy and to make sure more powerful individuals (physically, financially, intellectually, ect.) don't shit all over weaker individuals. If Bob and Tim or Veronica and Donna decide they want to get married. . . no one really gets shitted on. . . unless one of them is into that kind of thing. (Would "shat" be the proper verb conjugation there? )

That means that while some people might find it immoral, it's really none of their business. No one is getting harmed in anyway by these relationships or marriages. Legally, your church can never be forced to hold my marriage ceremony in it's walls. Legally, you cannot be forced to marry a gay person or attend a gay wedding. You're religion and it's beliefs of marriage are safe with in the walls of your religious institutions and in the walls of your home. The whole damn country, or even your whole damn state is not your domain. I'm sorry.

I also find it incredibly odd that no one mentions gay-friendly Abrahamic churches and synagogues during this argument. Aren't you guys, who are "defending" marriage, shitting on their religious freedom? I'm kinda surprised anyone's legally allowed to do that given the Lockian values this countries legal system was founded on.

I feel like I've been typing forever, and now I'm off to read about wrestling and acquire an avatar and a sig of some sort so I can look as cool as the rest of you guys when I post things.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Fuck it, I've been avoiding this topic because I'm sure people aren't going to like what I have to say, but here it goes.

I have a tendency to make homophobic remarks from time to time, just like I make racial slurs and whatnot. It's not because I actually hold any indifference toward people of different races or sexual preferences, it's because I honestly find bigotry and politically incorrect humor, well, humorous.

That being said, there are certain people I have a problem with, and that would be Religious nuts. People who think it is perfectly logical to base Federal Law based on a book about a "magic man in the sky." Sorry if this offends, I don't want to pigeon hole all Religious folks as being completely insane. There are a few of you people that actually get the fact that the life you have chosen is not the life for everybody. But to those that think it is reasonable to deny Gay people their right to be married, I have yet to see even one logical reason behind it. Religion is a choice, there is no scientific study that can prove otherwise. I can chose to believe in Santa Claus, and nobody here can prove me wrong. "But Nate, it is physically impossible for a man to travel to each individual house all over the world and deliver presents to all the children." How is it any different than a man in the sky who watches what you do throughout your life and ultimately determines whether you go to Heaven or Hell? If believing in Santa Claus is unreasonable, then so is believing in God.

Now I don't believe in Santa Claus either, I'm not a fucking child. That would also be the same logic I'd use for explaining why I don't believe in God. I think that the people back in the "Good Ole Days" were generally stupid. The only real way to get them to act like they had common sense was to tell them that there was someone watching them and that they'd better be good or there going to spend their entire afterlife in eternal hellfire. And you know what? I think it worked, so good for them. However nowadays, in a world where common sense exists, do you really need these stories to make logical choices and just not be a pimple on the ass of society? We know what's expected of us as human beings. If you need a book to tell you what you're supposed to do, then just do the world a favor and drink some Draino.

I would like to say one last thing to those that oppose Gay Marriage. Look back through the channels of history, to those that favored the Jim Crow Laws and those who opposed Blacks and Women having equal rights. You do realize that one day, you people are going to be viewed in the same light, right? Face it, whether you like it or not, common sense is going to prevail in this one and Gays will have equal rights. You might as well just jump ship.

Once again to anyone I offended..... Well I'll put it this way. If you're Religious but you're ok with Gay Marriage, Im genuinely sorry. If you're Religious and you're against Gay Marriage, I don't give a fuck what you think.

 

[RKOx7]

Hmm... so I don't really know where to start...

Before I put in my two cents... if anyone even wants my two cents I just wanna comment on Doc, you're so funny xD <3

So... I feel that gay marriage should be legalized and gay people should have equal rights.

Let's face it, and don't be offended by reality, you know half of you love watching lesbian porn. And I bet 1000% that most homophobic men would be fine with lesbians getting married... so why not gay men?

One time in my college class, we had a verbal debate between guys and girls and the girls asked the guys why they're so insecure/homophobic of gays... and one guy stood up and said "Because I don't want it ballsdeep in the ass..." Get real, just cuz your a straight dude doesn't mean all gay dudes want screw you up the butt. No one's going to rape you, no one wants to rape you, don't be scared, and accept gay marriage and equal gay rights.

As far as it not being natural goes... I don't think its a choice. I mean its a choice if you're bisexual sure, but thats not really a choice between your sexual orientation, just who you are fucking. Most bisexuals are one orientation or the other [Defined by if they're more attracted to women then they are men or vice versa], and they know it. Spartans have been doing it a long time ago, so... yeah... its not some new cult following phenomenon.

 

[The Gribbler]

Are we still arguing this? LOL! - Law has nothing to do with Religion anymore (Im pretty sure theres a law saying that in your country, dunno about mine :S) Let them get married under the legal definition, no one is forcing the church to adhere.

Just harden the fuck up and let everyone be equal.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

This has got to be the most ignorant, off topic thread in the history of this fucking forum. I should ban the lot of you.

TO address the THREAD TOPIC

Using the bible to argue anything in the world is ******ed, becuase, news flash, a lot of people don't give a fuck about the bible. You may as well be trying to back up reasoning using passages from The Cat In The Hat.

Unless someone of Christian faith is asking you what the bible says on a subject, its irrelevant. Any situation involving law, man, or will, The Bible is basically useless, to someone who doesn't belive in it, and in things the Bible has no bearing on (human laws, etc etc)