Support NeoGAF

[Rocket Punch]

That's an absolutely ridiculous claim, and shows you know no more about the Bible than what you read on some website.

Well, how about you enlighten us with your wisdom then... ?

 

[Spike Spiegel]

Nearly 80% of the total US population identifies itself as Christian, Palsy. A person could contend that those lawmakers are serving the will of a vast majority of the people, and listening to their constituency, by passing and enforcing laws that adhere to Christian beliefs and morality.

 

[Shoryuken]

The reason is a simple one. The legal relation between marriage and the guardianship of children are tied at the waist. If you think it's ok for a gay couple to adopt and raise children, then you're for it. If you don't want children in the foster care system to be a psychological case study on the effects of growing up in family that features two parents of the same sex, they you don't agree with it.

What's the problem with gay people adopting? I hope it's not because you believe that because they are gay that they'll automatically raise their children to be gay. Or do you think we should take away the parental rights of people that have raised homosexual children?

 

[Cerebral Palsy]

Nearly 80% of the total US population identifies itself as Christian, Palsy. A person could contend that those lawmakers are serving the will of a vast majority of the people, and listening to their constituency, by passing and enforcing laws that adhere to Christian beliefs and morality.

Well, the majority of the U.S. is also white. So lets strip away all the rights of black people. I mean, considering the majority of our population is white, lawmakers would be serving the vast majority of the people, and listening to their constituency, by passing and enforcing laws that adhere to their beliefs.

 

[Cerebral Palsy]

What's the problem with gay people adopting? I hope it's not becuase you believe that because their gay that they'll automatically raise their children to be gay. Or do you think we should take away the parental rights of people that have raised homosexual children?

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Apparently, children are the most important entity in our society to Republicans, but not unless the children are in a "healthy," christian family. They would rather have children rot in an orphanage than give them a home when it comes down to it.

 

[Rocket Punch]

So lets strip away all the rights of black people. I mean, considering the majority of our population is white, lawmakers would be serving the vast majority of the people, and listebing their constituency, by passing and enforcing laws that adhere to their beliefs.

Did you know that an argument for slavery during the time of the american civil war was based on the belief that God approved of slavery of other races because of certain passages in the Bible?

 

[Cerebral Palsy]

Did you know that an argument for slavery during the time of the american civil war was based on the belief that God approved of slavery of other races because of certain passages in the Bible?

Ah ha!

Blacks don't deserve rights! The bible says so! Let's amend the constitution to remove all the rights black people enjoy. They're threatening the white American family!

^^^ Sounds rediculous doesn't it? This is exactly what the Republicans are doing with the proposed gay marriage ban, and many other issues. Nothing but pure bigotry, and forcing their "values" on others.

 

[Tsubaki]

What does any of that do with Republicans trying to make Christianity a state religion?

My point was regarding gay marriage bans.

There is a misperception that because Republicans, Christians, etc. - whoever opposes gay marriage is fundamentalist, elitist, and prejudiced.

What I am saying is that the opposition to gay marriage is definitely rooted in Christian-Judeo teaching. But because -our society- ties a set of rights and priveleges to the concept of "marriage", that's where the conflict sets in.

I am saying that Christians have to oppose gay marriage as a title because that is their belief. Whether you agree or disgree with Christian values is up to you.

But the point is, Christianity is not about degrading, mocking, and devaluing gay people. In fact, their belief system is one of equality, where no one is perfect.

Most conservatives do come off as gay-haters, and perhaps really are. But the truth is, they're just hypocrites who use religion or culture to promote their own biases.

 

[bishoptl]

Making them the same thing is shoving a square peg in a round hole.

*spits coffee*

Maybe it's just the thread subject, but I found that hilariously funny. Lack of maturity or lack of sleep? YOU DECIDE

 

[Cerebral Palsy]

My point was regarding gay marriage bans.

There is a misperception that because Republicans, Christians, etc. - whoever opposes gay marriage is fundamentalist, elitist, and prejudiced.

What I am saying is that the opposition to gay marriage is definitely rooted in Christian-Judeo teaching. But because -our society- ties a set of rights and priveleges to the concept of "marriage", that's where the conflict sets in.

I am saying that Christians have to oppose gay marriage as a title because that is their belief. Whether you agree or disgree with Christian values is up to you.

But the point is, Christianity is not about degrading, mocking, and devaluing gay people. In fact, their belief system is one of equality, where no one is perfect.

Most conservatives do come off as gay-haters, and perhaps really are. But the truth is, they're just hypocrites who use religion or culture to promote their own biases.

Okay, so Christians have every right to oppose gays. Good for them. However, they still don't have the right to impose their religion on everyone by forcing it into government. Your point holds no merit at all. Since Christians must oppose gays by nature, I guess that means they have the right to take someone's rights away due to their beliefs? Maybe it's just me, but I think it is sick to alter the constitution to take away someone's freedoms. Is that what the constitution was constructed for?

Well, I'm very horny by nature, so I think the constitution should be amended to allow me to rape any random women I come across.

 

[sc0la]

Lack of maturity or lack of sleep? YOU DECIDE

Both in conjunction with the "liquid in mouth" humor multiplier. Why is shit so much funnier when you have something that can fall out of your mouth?

 

[brooklyngooner]

My point was regarding gay marriage bans.

But the point is, Christianity is not about degrading, mocking, and devaluing gay people. In fact, their belief system is one of equality, where no one is perfect.

And yet, Christians (I would venture to say most but cannot back this up with specific statistics) using religion as their reasons are denying equality to a specific group of people, proffering a pardigm in which they, as heterosexual, are perfect and homosexuals are inherently imperfect. How can you possibly reconcile this?

 

[levious]

Both in conjunction with the "liquid in mouth" humor multiplier. Why is shit so much funnier when you have something that can fall out of your mouth?

bishoptl sits at his PC with one of those helmets that dispense drink constantly through a straw... although it's usually grapefruit juice I think. The man is thirsty like Def Jam!

 

[clipunderground]

Just to let some of you guys know, one of my mom's friends is gay. He's raised his son into adulthood just fine. He's completely straight, married, and not "messed" up from growing up in an environment with a gay couple. If anything, it's helped him become a more accepting and understanding person.

What I think some of you should do is stop talking out of your ass like you know everything.

 

[Tsubaki]

Your point holds no merit at all. Since Christians must oppose gays by nature, I guess that means they have the right to take someone's rights away due to their beliefs?

No but that's just it.

The "rights" issue is a social one. Christianity never ever said that gays don't have rights. Christianity never said that domestic partners have less rights than married heterosexual couples. American society does.

And yet, Christians (I would venture to say most but cannot back this up with specific statistics) using religion as their reasons are denying equality to a specific group of people, proffering a pardigm in which they, as heterosexual, are perfect and homosexuals are inherently imperfect. How can you possibly reconcile this?

Because most Christians are sheep and don't even know what they believe, or are easily convinced that what they've been taught at church is Christian teaching. That's why in my original post, I go to great lengths to show that the Christian faith and Christian culture are two very different things. Man corrupts.

 

[maharg]

Actually, the law says they have more rights.

Also worth noting that most of those rights (and the claim is that there are a thousand of them granted by federal law in the US) have nothing at all to do with child rearing or raising. Nor is adoption denied explicitly to gay couples, married or unmarried, although as I understand it the policy is often to give adopted children to married couples and maybe even single people before gay couples.

If it's all about child rearing, as some people are always so quick to point out, a ban on gay people raising children, through adoption or surrogacy, would probably make more sense. Because the ban on gay marriage just ain't working.

 

[levious]

Actually, while I believe only one state outright bans gays from adoption (Florida I think) it is nowhere near "accepted" in any state. Your heirarchy is correct, married couple, then single, then crackheads, then gays.

My sister recently gave birth by way of a sperm donor, and it's likely going to take over a year red tape to have her partner adopt the child. You can imagine the hard time people have when there is no blood relative involved.

 

[MoccaJava]

One of the Republicans' main arguements on why gay marriage should be banned was that the healthiest way to raise a child is with a mother and father. Did they forget there are millions of single parents in the U.S., and that 50% of all marriages end in divorce?

Look, I fully support gay marriage and whatnot, but your response to this is just wrong. Obviously, they are calling the healthiest way to raise a child is with a mother and a father, instead of a mother and a mother or a father and a father (which I think holds some weight as you get into the teenage years). You either were really stupid and didn't see that, or you seem to take on the stance that if a gay couple was raising a child, they wouldn't get divorced, which of course isn't true - if a male leaves in a gay relationship, assuming that his dads are the only parents a child ever knows, he will still be just as hurt.

 

[maharg]

Actually, while I believe only one state outright bans gays from adoption (Florida I think) it is nowhere near "accepted" in any state. Your heirarchy is correct, married couple, then single, then crackheads, then gays.

My sister recently gave birth by way of a sperm donor, and it's likely going to take over a year red tape to have her partner adopt the child. You can imagine the hard time people have when there is no blood relative involved.

Well I didn't say accepted, did I. I said 'explicitly denied,' by which I meant through law.

 

[Drinky Crow]

Tsubaki: You DO realize that "marriage" is NOT a fundamentally Christian concept, correct?

I have no problem with individual Christian churches refusing to marry homosexuals under their auspices.

But if a gay couple DOES want to get married in a friendly church or legal ceremony, the SECULAR AND SEPARATE GOVERNMENT must acknowledge it. No-one's making YOU, as a Christian of a particular belief, acknowledge their marriage. However, your church and its beliefs should NOT deny homosexuals the right to marry outside of your church and faith, especially when the concept of marriage exists outside of your particular religion.

 

[Cerebral Palsy]

Look, I fully support gay marriage and whatnot, but your response to this is just wrong. Obviously, they are calling the healthiest way to raise a child is with a mother and a father, instead of a mother and a mother or a father and a father (which I think holds some weight as you get into the teenage years). You either were really stupid and didn't see that, or you seem to take on the stance that if a gay couple was raising a child, they wouldn't get divorced, which of course isn't true - if a male leaves in a gay relationship, assuming that his dads are the only parents a child ever knows, he will still be just as hurt.

You apparently didn't see any of the Congress session. The Republicans were constantly suggesting as if this amendment would somehow ensure that all children would growup in a "perfect family," which had both a mother and father, if it wasn't for gay marriage. "Gay marriages are attacking the American family" was a very popular quote with the majority of the Republican speakers. How exactly does gay marriage attack families built around a heterosexual relationship? Please tell me how banning gay marriage is going to increase the rate in which children growup in the Republicans' perfect idea of a family? How will allowing it decrease it for that matter? Is everyone going to turn gay, and get divorces if gay marriages happen? Really, please do tell me. Because not one of the Republican speakers seemed to be able to give any reasoning behind their claims.

I also fail to see how banning gay marriage is going to give the millions of single parent households in this country both a mother and father, and how it will fix our enormous rate of divorce (No way, gays could also divorce!? MY MIND IS BLOWN)? Please do explain. And if we'll go to the extremes of stripping away a person's freedoms to "ensure" this for our children, why aren't we also making divorce , and pregnancey out of wedlock criminal offenses? Why not also make being a single parent illegal, which would ensure all current "unhealthy" households would be fixed? I don't remember the Republicans mentioning that their idea of the perfect environment could also be an abusive situation, so why not go one step further and ban gays all together, and make it a law that everyone must enter a heterosexual marriage? This would apparently create a childhood utopia in our Country, and ensure that all children have a perfect life, right? Right?

Also, I would also love to hear how more people adopting, even gay couples, and giving children homes is a bad thing? Are these children going to automatically turn gay or something? Please explain.

In the end Bush and the Republicans have squandered away 4 years while accomplishing nothing. 4 years of broken promises. They knew this bill wouldn't pass as it also failed on the senate floor. This was nothing more than a weak attempt to divert the people's attention away from the real issues during this election period.




Edit: You got me. I am very stupid. :megarolleyes

 

[Fusebox]

Thats crazy, if they want gay people to stop having sex then they should let them get married - everybody knows you stop having sex once you get married.