http://gamingtrend.com
November 25, 2014, 12:38:53 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Let's talk about governing by religion  (Read 8395 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Knightshade Dragon
Administrator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 21081



View Profile WWW
« on: February 12, 2011, 05:20:54 PM »

Now that the Republicans are back in power we seem to have gone right back to the Gay Marriage and Abortion debate.   Both of these items are backed by religious belief that it is 'wrong' to do either of them - an affront to God.   Here are my questions:

1.) My wife is an Atheist.  Is it ok if she has an abortion because she's damned already?  What about her rights?  It seems like she has none unless she's joined a particular 'club' (you might call them churches). 

2.) My friend's girlfriend is a Muslim.  Are her beliefs to be trampled on because she isn't Christian? 

3.) Why are the Republicans so concerned who puts their dick into what?  I swear half the Senate is banging Craigslist like a drum and toe-tapping other dudes, so why the zealotry?  Why do we base any laws on 'morality' that can't be based on anything but religion?  We have rules separating Church and State but I don't see ANY of that being actually enforced.

Doesn't the government have enough to do?  Why do we have Christine O'Donnell talking about not masturbating?  Why does she care?  If anything, SHE needs to find the man in the little boat and calm down about what OTHER people are doing.   I'm a Christian, but I'm rapidly becoming less so.  I believe in God - it's his goddamned followers I have a problem with. 

Seriously...let's have a talk.  What the Hell is going on in this country that it seems to be populated by folks who are so concerned about other people's religion.
Logged

Ron Burke
EiC, Director of Gaming Trend
Gamertag:
Gaming Trend
PS3 Tag: GamingTrend
Ironrod
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3411



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2011, 06:15:15 PM »

Democrats and liberals ought to be happy when the Republicans veer into "values issues" because that's where they lose independents and moderates. The swing voters who swept them into power last year hired them to (1) focus on job creation; (2) reduce the budget deficit; and (3, for some) undo or revise health care reform. Period.
Logged

Curio City Online - Weird stuff you can buy
Curious Business - The Curio City Blog
Creepy_Smell
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 652

Load"*",8,1


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2011, 06:45:41 PM »

Its easier to go for the ban gays/abortions then to try and work to fix the economy, especially if its not something that affects you personally. OK is also going for creationism in science classes. Thats sure to bring in some good jobs here smile

I also think those at the top (all sides) don't necessarily care since they have the power/money/connections for it to not really affect them (Fly to another country to get abortion or have it discreetly done, not gay or can hire lawyer to guarantee their spouse gets same rights/treatment as a married couple or are just treated different due to power/money, etc.)

They do need to choose what denomination the US should be as just saying we are a Christian nation confuses my agnostic self. Which group's beliefs are the ones that we are expected to believe in or our laws should follow? I also want to sit back and enjoy the arguments over which side is right/more American.
Logged

Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2011, 01:23:14 AM »

I'm more a conservative than Republican, and I believe non-late-term abortions should be legal but not gay marriage. If gays want to be "married" then call it something else that's in all aspects equal. Just don't call it marriage.

And these debates may be coming up again more so that the conservative constituents feel their newly-elected are listening.

In other words, lip service.
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 5375


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2011, 02:34:32 AM »

Bullet points 1-3 in the OP, but in particular points 1 and 2, seem like liberal outrage gone horribly awry.
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
WalkingFumble
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 654



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2011, 03:30:20 AM »

Quote from: pr0ner on February 13, 2011, 02:34:32 AM

Bullet points 1-3 in the OP, but in particular points 1 and 2, seem like liberal outrage gone horribly awry.

Maybe...but what is the government's interest to control what people do with their bodies?  Because they can?  I don't agree with federal money being used for abortions, except for some cases, but what is the point in controlling it altogether.  Of course Christian viewpoints differ, but it is not the government's call.

I think Ron's examples are sometimes extreme...but I also think most of the time he is just venting.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2011, 03:35:02 AM by WalkingFumble » Logged

XBL: I3L00DFUMBLE  -  132,578     |     PSN: WalkingFumble     |     Nintendo Revolution:  1440 9434 2198 4442
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 5375


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2011, 03:43:21 AM »

Quote from: WalkingFumble on February 13, 2011, 03:30:20 AM

Quote from: pr0ner on February 13, 2011, 02:34:32 AM

Bullet points 1-3 in the OP, but in particular points 1 and 2, seem like liberal outrage gone horribly awry.

Maybe...but what is the government's interest to control what people do with their bodies?  Because they can?  I don't agree with federal money being used for abortions, except for some cases, but what is the point in controlling it altogether.  Of course Christian viewpoints differ, but it is not the government's call.

I think Ron's examples are sometimes extreme...but I also think most of the time he is just venting.

I don't think the government should be involved in the process of telling people what they should do along as it doesn't affect me (or you, or John Doe) directly.  But the government's interest in that stuff is, a lot of times, a byproduct of what their constituents want.
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1621


View Profile WWW
« Reply #7 on: February 13, 2011, 07:41:32 PM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 13, 2011, 01:23:14 AM

I'm more a conservative than Republican, and I believe non-late-term abortions should be legal but not gay marriage.

Separate can never be equal. There is no logical reason to deny same sex couples complete equality under the law, which will never occur if gay and straight relationships are organized and recognized under different systems.

Quote
If gays want to be "married" then call it something else that's in all aspects equal. Just don't call it marriage.

So you deserve the word, but I don't? I grew up in the same culture. I put the same value on the concept of marriage as you do. Why should your relationship be called a marriage, but mine not? Becaue of your stupid religious beliefs? Why must I live under the thumb of your "god"?
Logged

Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2011, 10:18:10 PM »

This is why i'm a conservative: marriage is a term created to describe the union between a man and woman.

You can have your equality, I dont give a shit about that. Just call it something else.

Why do you gotta change it? Don't I have the right to keep it the same?
« Last Edit: February 13, 2011, 10:21:07 PM by Zekester » Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1621


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: February 13, 2011, 11:28:53 PM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 13, 2011, 10:18:10 PM

This is why i'm a conservative: marriage is a term created to describe the union between a man and woman.

No, it wasn't. Marriage is a term created to describe many numerous arrangements, only one of which is "the union between a man and woman." At various times, far more often than not marriage has involved one man and many women, very rarely one (very powerful) woman and many men, usually with strict regulations on the sorts of men and women that could be joined in marriage -- limitations based on race, based on religion, based on age, based on previous marital condition, based on caste, based on tribe, etc. Over time, societies have evolved, and they have changed the definition of marriage when it suited them. Marriage has proven, over the course of human history, to be an extremely malleable, mutable term.

Until recently, the term marriage in much of America meant a man and a woman of the same race, for example.

The term marriage was not *created* to describe the definition of marriage as a "union between a man and a woman." In fact, that definition is not universally applied in our current time, either. That's not the definition of marriage in several states of this nation, or many nations in this world.

At some point, a group of people who proceeded you changed the definition of marriage to mean "a man and a woman," and before that the term marriage meant many different things over it's own history. Your definition is, in the scheme of human history, very new, and certainly not the original definition of the term. So what you're saying is that the term should be allowed to evolve and change until such point as you became aware of it, and after that, further revision must be halted -- that is an historically ignorant, selfish, and solipsistic position to take.

Quote
You can have your equality, I dont give a shit about that. Just call it something else.

Unless gays and straights legally access the *exact* same institution, how can you guarantee that equality? Separate and equal does not work. Inevitably, certain rights and privileges assigned to "marriage" do not translate to whatever lesser form of status you'd be willing to bequeath upon us poor, wretched queers.

Quote
Why do you gotta change it? Don't I have the right to keep it the same?

No, you do not have a right to deny me equality under the law. A gay relationship in a committed union is every bit as valid, every bit as sacred, every bit as wholesome, every bit as normal as a similar straight relationship, and it deserves absolute equality under the law, which can only be achieved by having both relationships administered and recognized under the exact same system. An arrangement where they are treated separately will not only lead to inevitable inequalities, it implies an inherent inequality in its basic arrangement.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2011, 11:30:27 PM by Fireball1244 » Logged

Scraper
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3980



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 14, 2011, 12:25:50 AM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on February 13, 2011, 11:28:53 PM

Quote from: Zekester on February 13, 2011, 10:18:10 PM

This is why i'm a conservative: marriage is a term created to describe the union between a man and woman.

No, it wasn't. Marriage is a term created to describe many numerous arrangements, only one of which is "the union between a man and woman." At various times, far more often than not marriage has involved one man and many women, very rarely one (very powerful) woman and many men, usually with strict regulations on the sorts of men and women that could be joined in marriage -- limitations based on race, based on religion, based on age, based on previous marital condition, based on caste, based on tribe, etc. Over time, societies have evolved, and they have changed the definition of marriage when it suited them. Marriage has proven, over the course of human history, to be an extremely malleable, mutable term.

Until recently, the term marriage in much of America meant a man and a woman of the same race, for example.

The term marriage was not *created* to describe the definition of marriage as a "union between a man and a woman." In fact, that definition is not universally applied in our current time, either. That's not the definition of marriage in several states of this nation, or many nations in this world.

At some point, a group of people who proceeded you changed the definition of marriage to mean "a man and a woman," and before that the term marriage meant many different things over it's own history. Your definition is, in the scheme of human history, very new, and certainly not the original definition of the term. So what you're saying is that the term should be allowed to evolve and change until such point as you became aware of it, and after that, further revision must be halted -- that is an historically ignorant, selfish, and solipsistic position to take.

Quote
You can have your equality, I dont give a shit about that. Just call it something else.

Unless gays and straights legally access the *exact* same institution, how can you guarantee that equality? Separate and equal does not work. Inevitably, certain rights and privileges assigned to "marriage" do not translate to whatever lesser form of status you'd be willing to bequeath upon us poor, wretched queers.

Quote
Why do you gotta change it? Don't I have the right to keep it the same?

No, you do not have a right to deny me equality under the law. A gay relationship in a committed union is every bit as valid, every bit as sacred, every bit as wholesome, every bit as normal as a similar straight relationship, and it deserves absolute equality under the law, which can only be achieved by having both relationships administered and recognized under the exact same system. An arrangement where they are treated separately will not only lead to inevitable inequalities, it implies an inherent inequality in its basic arrangement.

Oh Nos, please don't try to enlighten a very limited and narrow view of history and reality.
Logged

" And they are a strong and frightening force, impervious to, and immunized against, the feeble lance of mere reason." Isaac Asimov
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: February 14, 2011, 01:17:44 AM »

For me the whole abortion part of it has zero to do with religion, I am an agnostic libertarian who doesn't believe abortion should be legal.   For many other people as well religion has nothing to do with their opposition.
Logged
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #12 on: February 14, 2011, 02:24:02 AM »

The original definition of marriage was born from the religious-based union between a man and a woman. You can try to spin it any way you want to make it suit you, it's what liberals and progressives are best at. But the fact remains, and you hate it.

It DOES NOT have to be called the same thing to be equal. That's just bullshit. And I have every right to expect things to NOT change just as you want them to. To deny me of that is going against what you believe, but you can't or won't see that.

« Last Edit: February 14, 2011, 02:43:15 AM by Zekester » Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
th'FOOL
Executive Producer and Editor-At-Large
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 5021


Never whistle while you're pissing


View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: February 14, 2011, 02:59:25 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 02:24:02 AM

The original definition of marriage was born from the religious-based union between a man and a woman. You can try to spin it any way you want to make it suit you, it's what liberals and progressives are best at. But the fact remains, and you hate it.

uh, no. The etymology of marriage stems from maritus (latin) which itself comes from 'mas', which means man or manly. The concept of marriage has had many different cultural meanings depending on the culture itself, only some of which have any ties to religion.

I say keep the term 'Holy Matrimony' and let the word marriage be agnostic. Let's put this semantic bullshit in the can.
Logged

Mike Dunn
Executive Producer & Managing Editor, GamingTrend
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: February 14, 2011, 03:08:38 AM »

a matter of interpretation, at the very least. My Bible definition supersedes yours, for example.

But let's get to the real reason for wanting this: just like so many liberal/progressive desires, to stick it in the eye of conservatives. Because all things being equal except the word, there's no good reason to change it.

But nooooooooo, that's not good enough.

and that's the real bullshit.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2011, 03:13:23 AM by Zekester » Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
Creepy_Smell
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 652

Load"*",8,1


View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: February 14, 2011, 03:19:21 AM »

Why have 2 sets of laws (marriage law & civil union law) that would cover the same thing? Seems like a lot more bureacracy and not very conservative/small gov't. For any change to 1 you would have to do it for both. Lots of paperwork.
Logged

Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #16 on: February 14, 2011, 03:23:20 AM »

because it's a matter of principal to a conservative. and a big one at that.

before anyone goes accusing me of being anti-gay, i'm actually not. I don't care if that's what you're into, except when it starts forcing changes just for the sake of change.
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 5375


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: February 14, 2011, 03:26:19 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:23:20 AM

because it's a matter of principal to a conservative. and a big one at that.

 saywhat

No.  It's not.
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: February 14, 2011, 03:27:28 AM »

uhh, ya it is.

do you need a lesson in what it really means to be a conservative?
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
WalkingFumble
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 654



View Profile
« Reply #19 on: February 14, 2011, 03:27:36 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:23:20 AM

because it's a matter of principal to a conservative. and a big one at that.

before anyone goes accusing me of being anti-gay, i'm actually not. I don't care if that's what you're into, except when it starts forcing changes just for the sake of change.

ohh come on, dont force your opinions based on a label.  if you are for gays getting married, leave it at that.
Logged

XBL: I3L00DFUMBLE  -  132,578     |     PSN: WalkingFumble     |     Nintendo Revolution:  1440 9434 2198 4442
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: February 14, 2011, 03:32:13 AM »

the only ones forcing their opinions are those forcing change.

I am only expressing mine.
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 5375


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: February 14, 2011, 03:35:23 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:27:28 AM

uhh, ya it is.

do you need a lesson in what it really means to be a conservative?

No, it's not.  And no, I don't.
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #22 on: February 14, 2011, 03:37:40 AM »

Quote from: pr0ner on February 14, 2011, 03:35:23 AM

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:27:28 AM

uhh, ya it is.

do you need a lesson in what it really means to be a conservative?

No, it's not.  And no, I don't.

Oh, this is just brilliance defined.
 

Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
WalkingFumble
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 654



View Profile
« Reply #23 on: February 14, 2011, 03:43:55 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:32:13 AM

the only ones forcing their opinions are those forcing change.

I am only expressing mine.

I'm glad you said that.  Your personal opinion should have to say in that other people choose to do.
Logged

XBL: I3L00DFUMBLE  -  132,578     |     PSN: WalkingFumble     |     Nintendo Revolution:  1440 9434 2198 4442
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1621


View Profile WWW
« Reply #24 on: February 14, 2011, 03:44:40 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 02:24:02 AM

The original definition of marriage was born from the religious-based union between a man and a woman. You can try to spin it any way you want to make it suit you, it's what liberals and progressives are best at. But the fact remains, and you hate it.

The fact is that the first recorded marriages are in ancient Egypt, and were not religious in nature or facilitation. They were also polygamist.
Logged

Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: February 14, 2011, 03:47:15 AM »

Quote from: WalkingFumble on February 14, 2011, 03:43:55 AM

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:32:13 AM

the only ones forcing their opinions are those forcing change.

I am only expressing mine.

I'm glad you said that.  Your personal opinion should have to say in that other people choose to do.

might want to edit your post here....I have no clue what you just said.

Quote
The fact is that the first recorded marriages are in ancient Egypt, and were not religious in nature or facilitation. They were also polygamist.

again, I will fire back with my christian definition that supercedes yours.
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1621


View Profile WWW
« Reply #26 on: February 14, 2011, 03:49:04 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:08:38 AM

a matter of interpretation, at the very least. My Bible definition supersedes yours, for example.

The Bible has nothing to do with the topic of marriage, which in this case is a secular governmental institution administered by the state and federal governments of the United States.

Quote
But let's get to the real reason for wanting this: just like so many liberal/progressive desires, to stick it in the eye of conservatives.

Right, I just want to piss on conservatives. It couldn't possibly be that I want to be able to get married because I grew up just like any other American, associating marriage with the formation of family, and the ultimate goal of any romantic relationship. Kids don't grow up wanting to be "civil unioned" when they're older. We grow up planning to get married. I have just as much right to the word, and claim to the institution, as you do.
Logged

Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1621


View Profile WWW
« Reply #27 on: February 14, 2011, 03:50:52 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:23:20 AM

because it's a matter of principal to a conservative. and a big one at that.

Plenty of conservatives support gay marriage. There is nothing unconservative about the notion of equality for all people under the institutions of the law.
Logged

Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #28 on: February 14, 2011, 03:52:59 AM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on February 14, 2011, 03:49:04 AM

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:08:38 AM

a matter of interpretation, at the very least. My Bible definition supersedes yours, for example.

The Bible has nothing to do with the topic of marriage, which in this case is a secular governmental institution administered by the state and federal governments of the United States.

Quote
But let's get to the real reason for wanting this: just like so many liberal/progressive desires, to stick it in the eye of conservatives.

Right, I just want to piss on conservatives. It couldn't possibly be that I want to be able to get married because I grew up just like any other American, associating marriage with the formation of family, and the ultimate goal of any romantic relationship. Kids don't grow up wanting to be "civil unioned" when they're older. We grow up planning to get married. I have just as much right to the word, and claim to the institution, as you do.

The Bible has everything to do with it. It's quite arrogant to believe your opinions are more important than someone elses.

and you can do everything you just mentioned in your second part without forcing change of the word itself.
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
WalkingFumble
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 654



View Profile
« Reply #29 on: February 14, 2011, 03:53:51 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:47:15 AM

might want to edit your post here....I have no clue what you just said.

Do I really need to copy and paste your what you've already said?

And how can your personal opinions force other people's actions?  Just give it up.
Logged

XBL: I3L00DFUMBLE  -  132,578     |     PSN: WalkingFumble     |     Nintendo Revolution:  1440 9434 2198 4442
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #30 on: February 14, 2011, 03:54:22 AM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on February 14, 2011, 03:50:52 AM

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:23:20 AM

because it's a matter of principal to a conservative. and a big one at that.

Plenty of conservatives support gay marriage. There is nothing unconservative about the notion of equality for all people under the institutions of the law.

sure they do. me not among them, though.
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1621


View Profile WWW
« Reply #31 on: February 14, 2011, 03:55:04 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:47:15 AM

Quote
The fact is that the first recorded marriages are in ancient Egypt, and were not religious in nature or facilitation. They were also polygamist.

again, I will fire back with my christian definition that supercedes yours.

The fact remains there are many, many definitions of marriage, including definitions that involve more than two spouses, and definitions that involve spouses of the same sex. The word marriage is not yours. It does not belong to you, to your religion or to your political movement.

In America, marriage is a governmental institution that can, and has, been revised to suit the needs of the population, and it will be again to include same sex couples.
Logged

Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #32 on: February 14, 2011, 03:56:25 AM »

Quote from: WalkingFumble on February 14, 2011, 03:53:51 AM

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:47:15 AM

might want to edit your post here....I have no clue what you just said.

Do I really need to copy and paste your what you've already said?

And how can your personal opinions force other people's actions?  Just give it up.

Im not forcing anything on you or anyone else. For fuck's sake, i'm expressing mine. Are you high or something?

But those that want to change the meaning of the word marriage in the United States are the ones trying to force their opinion. How can you not see this?
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1621


View Profile WWW
« Reply #33 on: February 14, 2011, 03:56:46 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:54:22 AM

Quote from: Fireball1244 on February 14, 2011, 03:50:52 AM

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:23:20 AM

because it's a matter of principal to a conservative. and a big one at that.

Plenty of conservatives support gay marriage. There is nothing unconservative about the notion of equality for all people under the institutions of the law.

sure they do. me not among them, though.

Right, some conservatives support gay marriage. Some are religious zealots and bigots.
Logged

Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: February 14, 2011, 03:58:08 AM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on February 14, 2011, 03:55:04 AM

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:47:15 AM

Quote
The fact is that the first recorded marriages are in ancient Egypt, and were not religious in nature or facilitation. They were also polygamist.

again, I will fire back with my christian definition that supercedes yours.

The fact remains there are many, many definitions of marriage, including definitions that involve more than two spouses, and definitions that involve spouses of the same sex. The word marriage is not yours. It does not belong to you, to your religion or to your political movement.

In America, marriage is a governmental institution that can, and has, been revised to suit the needs of the population, and it will be again to include same sex couples.

Behold the liberal/progressive definition.
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #35 on: February 14, 2011, 03:58:53 AM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on February 14, 2011, 03:56:46 AM

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:54:22 AM

Quote from: Fireball1244 on February 14, 2011, 03:50:52 AM

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:23:20 AM

because it's a matter of principal to a conservative. and a big one at that.

Plenty of conservatives support gay marriage. There is nothing unconservative about the notion of equality for all people under the institutions of the law.

sure they do. me not among them, though.

Right, some conservatives support gay marriage. Some are religious zealots and bigots.

and here we start with the personal attacks.

LOL, thanks for not letting me down  icon_wink
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1621


View Profile WWW
« Reply #36 on: February 14, 2011, 04:00:06 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:52:59 AM

The Bible has everything to do with it.

How? The Bible has no authority when it comes to American law. It is not a history book, and does not record the origin of the institution of marriage, or the historical origin of anything whatsoever.
Logged

Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #37 on: February 14, 2011, 04:01:10 AM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on February 14, 2011, 04:00:06 AM

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:52:59 AM

The Bible has everything to do with it.

How? The Bible has no authority when it comes to American law. It is not a history book, and does not record the origin of the institution of marriage, or the historical origin of anything whatsoever.

Behold.... what makes someone NOT conservative.

porner, are you paying attention?
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1621


View Profile WWW
« Reply #38 on: February 14, 2011, 04:02:58 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:58:08 AM

Quote from: Fireball1244 on February 14, 2011, 03:55:04 AM

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:47:15 AM

Quote
The fact is that the first recorded marriages are in ancient Egypt, and were not religious in nature or facilitation. They were also polygamist.

again, I will fire back with my christian definition that supercedes yours.

The fact remains there are many, many definitions of marriage, including definitions that involve more than two spouses, and definitions that involve spouses of the same sex. The word marriage is not yours. It does not belong to you, to your religion or to your political movement.

In America, marriage is a governmental institution that can, and has, been revised to suit the needs of the population, and it will be again to include same sex couples.

Behold the liberal/progressive definition.

It's not liberal or conservative. It's a matter of fact that institution of marriage first arose, according to all historical records, in Egypt. It's a fact that the term marriage has meant a wide variety of things over the course of human history, most often polyamorous arrangements, most recently monogamous relationships of pairs, both mixed and same gender. It is also a fact that in America marriage is a governmental institution that has been significantly revised at different points of history, and can and will be in the future.

Sorry if the facts are somehow unacceptable to you.
Logged

Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1621


View Profile WWW
« Reply #39 on: February 14, 2011, 04:04:59 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 04:01:10 AM

Quote from: Fireball1244 on February 14, 2011, 04:00:06 AM

Quote from: Zekester on February 14, 2011, 03:52:59 AM

The Bible has everything to do with it.

How? The Bible has no authority when it comes to American law. It is not a history book, and does not record the origin of the institution of marriage, or the historical origin of anything whatsoever.

Behold.... what makes someone NOT conservative.

porner, are you paying attention?

What does the Bible have to do with conservatism? One must treat the Bible as a factual historical record to be a conservative? Conservatives have to believe in bullshit like worldwide floods and talking snakes? Most conservatives I know are far to intelligent to go in for that rubbish.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.239 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.091s, 2q)