I don't see why people care so much about what other people are doing with their lives. If two people want to get married, let them. They don't have to get married in church, I know I don't plan to.

It's not fair at all. I was discriminated as a child and teen for being feminine, kicked out of my home at 16 for being gay, and am occasionally assaulted because of my decision. Do I want to get married someday? Hell yes! I don't honestly see a problem with it, but apparently it is? It's a really stupid thing to not allow in the 'Country of the Free'. Well, not so free in marriage are we?

Yes, they should be allowed to marry. It should be about love, not religion - who deems the act of being gay a sin. Even gay people are religious. There is nothing wrong with gay people. They deserve the same rights as straight couples. They should be equal.

Yes, Gays should be able to marry. I mean sure its not a marriage thats not possible for reproduction but other people get married and they don't reproduce. My opion is if your gay and you find someone out there for you good for you and happy life to ya. Tell you the truth I don't even understand why people discremante against gays, I mean come on there are worst things happening in the world than two men or women getting married. Also if you think about it it kinda of goes against the separation of church and state if you look at it that way. Other words discremation against gays is just STUPID!

Originally Posted by Shuu

I've always stuck by my answer of 'Sure! Why not?'
I mean, really.. if they wanna get married then what's the big deal?
Just let them.
I don't even like grouping them together like that.
'Let THEM get married.' >_>

Let people get married.. regardless of their preference. :3
Why does it matter?

yeah, that basically sums up how i feel. i mean, seriously, what makes gays any different from anyone else? also, think about how people don't do ">_>" that until they know that the person is gay... but even after they know it is still the same person. so how does other people knowing that they are gay give them any less rights?
and seriously, if you (i dont mean anyone specific, just...someone who is against gay marriage, and i dont mean to be rude, i just want to express my opinion) if you are gay and are against gay marriage, dont get married. but if you arent gay, why do you care? i mean, it doesnt directly affect you, does it? i think if gay people want to get married they have the same right to do so as anyone else.
i guess that quote didnt sum it up did it? :shock: i should write an essay on gay marriage. this is one of those few things that i have a strong opinion on. :)

I have mixed feelings about gay marriage.

Technically, gay marriage is against what the Bible states(a point I'm sure has already been addressed several times in this thread). However, I do support gay marriage because I know several gay people and see how they wish they could get married, but just can't. I really feel for them. I think there should be a gay marriage equivalent if gay marriage itself never gets enough support behind it to become nationally legal. That kind of sounds prejudiced in a way, because that's kind of the foundation school of thinking that started segregation many years ago. However, I think this is a bit different, because I want gay marriage to be legal, but at the very least, they should get their own unique alternative.

Originally Posted by khboy0

I have mixed feelings about gay marriage.

Technically, gay marriage is against what the Bible states(a point I'm sure has already been addressed several times in this thread). However, I do support gay marriage because I know several gay people and see how they wish they could get married, but just can't. I really feel for them. I think there should be a gay marriage equivalent if gay marriage itself never gets enough support behind it to become nationally legal. That kind of sounds prejudiced in a way, because that's kind of the foundation school of thinking that started segregation many years ago. However, I think this is a bit different, because I want gay marriage to be legal, but at the very least, they should get their own unique alternative.

Gay marriage is not mentioned in the bible at all, sorry to break it to you.

Gay sex itself is mentioned once, maybe twice, but since the "old testament doesn't count" (you can eat shellfish and shave and wear "mixed linens" thanks to ignoring the old testament), none of those are applicable either.

Gay marriage is not mentioned in the bible at all, sorry to break it to you.

Gay sex itself is mentioned once, maybe twice, but since the "old testament doesn't count" (you can eat shellfish and shave and wear "mixed linens" thanks to ignoring the old testament), none of those are applicable either

Technically, no. Gay marriage is never mentioned in the Bible.

But homosexuality, as you said, is addressed in the Bible here and there. When it comes to the Bible, since it doesn't approve of gay sex, why would it approve of gay marriage?(personifying the Bible, of course)

Why must you be so technical about everything I say, Keyori? :)

Actually, whenever it does mention gay sex, it talks about it being wrong for other reasons -- pagan ritual prostitution and rape, in most places. In others, teh ghey secks is only assumed (as in when it talks about people having unnatural desires for one another, or committing devious sexual acts, or when it says that effeminate men are abominations). Even in the OT, gay sex was mentioned as making one ritually unclean and unworthy of entering the Temple, not being a sin against God.

But you forgot the latter (more important) part of Keyori's post: Jesus told us that the rules stated in the Old Testament no longer apply, because he was one pretty cool guy with really advanced views, who realised that those rules had a meaning back then (too few people, so homosexuality was a threat to society back then), but where no longer up-to-date.

But you forgot the latter (more important) part of Keyori's post: Jesus told us that the rules stated in the Old Testament no longer apply, because he was one pretty cool guy with really advanced views, who realised that those rules had a meaning back then (too few people, so homosexuality was a threat to society back then), but where no longer up-to-date.

I didn't ignore it or even forget it. I was just addressing the first part of her post. I accept that point she made, just as I accept yours. I wanted her to understand my views is all. I don't like talking about my personal views on deep, heavy stuff, but when I bring myself to talk about them, I want people to know them, as they are the reason I'm here.

In any case, I support gay marriage, so there's no need to argue with me.

I'm not arguing with you... T_T

I actually have high regard for you for supporting your friends despite it going against your beliefs - and thus found it really important to point out that it actually does not, since Christianity is by far more of a great religion than Church makes it out to be. <3

I'm not addressing anyone in particular: this is just a precautionary argument because I'm sure it'll crop up from someone who actually believes in this junk. I've typed this same thing over and over and I've never had anyone successfully challenge it with New Testament verses.

So here goes:
The only section in the new testament that mentions homosexuality is in 1 Corinthians.

Here's the original passage in Latin: (1 Cor 6:9-10)

An nescitis quia iniqui regnum Dei non possidebunt? Nolite errare: Neque fornicarii, neque idolis servientes, neque adulteri, (10)neque molles, neque masculorum concubitores, neque fures, neque avari, neque ebriosi, neque maledici, neque rapaces regnum Dei possidebunt.

There is not a single word that translates into "homosexual." "Fornicarii" is fornication, "idolis servientes" means "servant of an idol" or conversely, "idolater," "adulteri" is adultery, "molles" roughly translates into "to soften," which is slang for effeminate, "masculorum concubitores" are male concubines, "fures" are theives, "avari" is avarice (greed), "ebriosi" is inebriated (drunk), "maledici" literally means "cursed" and could refer to a number of things, and "rapaces" are swindlers. No homosexuals here.

I'd like to point out the male concubine though. A male concubine would be an unrelated male living in a household with a status lower than a wife. This would basically be a male slave or prostitute. Hypothetically, if a male married another male, neither would be concubines. Housing a male neighbor since his house burned down does not make him a concubine either. Getting lovey-dovey with your male neighbor after his house burned down does not make him a concubine. Don't rape him though--although it doesn't make him a concubine, rape is still sinful.

Now, in the old testament (WHICH DOESN'T EVEN COUNT YOU CAFETERIA CHRISTIANS), Leviticus says something along the lines of "Thou shalt not lie with a man as with a woman." That's because women were property and raped regularly. It was considered an abomination to treat a fellow man as unequal. So if you slept with a man as you did with a woman, that implies that you raped him.

Then there's another one (I forget off of the top of my head) that talks about some big sex orgy, but that has nothing to do with the gay sex and everything to do with the fact that the sex was lustful and without love. The people were disrespecting God by having sex with everyone and anyone, and THAT was the sin--not because there happened to be some gay sex.

So in conclusion, the bible clearly states:

Don't rape your bro and
Don't have sex like a ho.

(ha ha I'm so clever)

*huff huff huff*

Okay. Now that my rant is out of the way, I can just quote this whole post if someone tries to bring up "B-b-but BIBLE!" at all (other users should feel free to quote me too :heart:)

Originally Posted by Keyori

Now, in the old testament (WHICH DOESN'T EVEN COUNT YOU CAFETERIA CHRISTIANS), Leviticus says something along the lines of "Thou shalt not lie with a man as with a woman." That's because women were property and raped regularly. It was considered an abomination to treat a fellow man as unequal. So if you slept with a man as you did with a woman, that implies that you raped him.

I've actually seen the argument that it means *literally*, as in, missionary. The "normal" way of having sex put women in a submissive position. As you mentioned, to suggest that a man was on the same level as a woman, even just in the way you treated him, was very disrespectful and offensive.

I'm just glad no one brought up Sodom and Gomorrah. That always got me. They were robbing and killing every visitor to the city, and they wanted to gang rape the angels, and yet somehow, people think the moral of that story is not to have gay sex. Kinda seems like they're missing the point.

*jumps in without reading... it is 18 pages, after all* @[email protected]

Yeah, I never quite got the whole Sodom and Gomorrah thing. Granted, I'm not a scriptual scolar, but from what I remember the only big thing about S&G is that they (whoever they are) were being all around douches and has nothing to do with homosexuality. o_O

Now, as a bisexual individual, I kinda obviously support gay marriage. I am not willing to accept the "civil union" crap, even if a rose is still just as sweet if called by another name. Marriage is a binding legal contract that comes with more rights and priviledges under the law than I care to count (but between various state and federal, it comes to some thousands). I have every respect for people who worship the god of Abraham, however their personal beliefs on what their religions say about homosexuality be damned. We aren't a Christian nation, nor a Jewish nation, nor a Muslim nation, nor a Wiccan nation, nor a Buddhist nation, nor a Taoist nation, nor a Whatever nation. Barring homosexuals the right to join in that nice, binding legal contract of marriage is un-Constitutional.

Of course, I'm sure (at least I hope) that this has been touched somewhere in the previous 18 pages that I've failed to read. >_>

Im religous so I think its wrong, but for all I care, think whatever you want.

Saying you're religious isn't really an excuse these days, considering there are gay clergy and a lot of religious people who find nothing wrong with it.

If you're of the Christian religion, it's definitely not an excuse for the reasons I outlined in my long rant.

And if you're not, you really shouldn't be speaking for me as I fall under the label 'religious' just as much as you do :P

Cough >.>
interesting discussion..?

My thoughts on the matter are simply this. We are told, over and over, that same-sex would ruin the beautiful institution known as marriage. But isn't marriage about love now? If two females and two males wish to marry each other, then by all means let them. What harm is it going to cause?

I agree full heartily with the person who made this.

But those are just my thoughts. And I will keep them that way until someone can LOGICALLY prove to me why the same sex can not be married.

Originally Posted by Ari'iela

Now that brings a lot into perspective. I think by banning homosexual marriage, they are pushing certain beliefs down others throats. It wasn't to long ago that it was illegal to marry someone who was a different race then you. Namely African Americans and Caucasian couples. It probably won't be much longer until it is accepted, until then we have the closed minded "Christians" who teach not to judge one another but actually do.

@Philomel: lol...That's the most over used argument in the homosexual department. Although the word Sodomy comes from the ancient city of Sodom. That is a totally different story as well. But I remember being on Gaia..and people using that story for the reasons why homosexuality is wrong. There are a lot of things in this world that is wrong. Driving drunk, beating children, stealing....homosexuality is something..that is genetic (in my opinion). Just the same as a man loving a woman, if he loves another man..

People are free to do what they want. Try to take that away from them and there will be consequences.

Originally Posted by pamiishammy

People are free to do what they want. Try to take that away from them and there will be consequences.

But you said that you're against abortion in all circumstances... so is that really how you feel, or does it only apply to marriage?

Originally Posted by Keyori

But you said that you're against abortion in all circumstances... so is that really how you feel, or does it only apply to marriage?

Pist...its called double standards... lol