Are we going to use protesting groups as a representative of the whole. Isn't that why people see Pro-Lifers (which I am) as psychos? Also, what is the point of the church/protest thing? By the way, this forum has given me a ton of ideas of what to argue against. I thank you guys.

 

I was just informing a situation that occurred. No point to it in this debate. Just information.

 

Having points to argue is easy.

Man again messing with God's basic idea. They will face him someday.

 

Marriage=Man leaves his parents and unites with a woman who also left her parents and they are Married. Same sex marriage just doesn't fit.

 

If you are Gay, ask God to change your desire and repent so you don't live in torment.

 

I have some verses if someone wants to see them.

 

That's all biblical passage, I'm with you. If God finds them as sinners, than let him be the judge. If your particular denomination doesn't recognize it, great. Mine doesn't either, and I've got to be honest, I'm not comfortable with it myself. HOWEVER THE BIBLE SCHOLARS didn't write our constitution. This was founded as a country where church and state were to be seperated. I appreciate your Christian beliefs, I have them myself. However, you can't deny someone liberty just B/c you've cited Paul to the Corinthians.

Edited November 14, 200817 yr by rockmom
Fixed quote

How about if it is scientifically proven, as pedophiles claim, that they are born that way. You want them to deny their natural urge for intercourse?

 

And for those that want to ignore my point by saying that I am comparing the two, I am not.

 

I am pointing out that they BOTH make the SAME CLAIMS. Why is one right and one wrong?

 

Again, you are reaching sooo far on this one. Again the state has a legitimate interest in ensuring the welfare of children. Incest injures children and is completely different than two consenting adults. You can keep driving the cart off the path and ask me about rapists and the like, or about a guy and his pet gerbel. You've still done nothing to show how it furthers state interests in promoting that couple marry by banning gay people from marrying. Nothing. I've gotten a bunch of Bible passages and procreation arguments. Yet nobody has explained how the state interest of procreation, and child welfare would be changed in any way by allowing gay marriage. That's the burden that the state would have to show, and it can't. All it has to argue for its side is the morality of the majority.

Again, you are reaching sooo far on this one. Again the state has a legitimate interest in ensuring the welfare of children. Incest injures children and is completely different than two consenting adults. You can keep driving the cart off the path and ask me about rapists and the like, or about a guy and his pet gerbel. You've still done nothing to show how it furthers state interests in promoting that couple marry by banning gay people from marrying. Nothing. I've gotten a bunch of Bible passages and procreation arguments. Yet nobody has explained how the state interest of procreation, and child welfare would be changed in any way by allowing gay marriage. That's the burden that the state would have to show, and it can't. All it has to argue for its side is the morality of the majority.

 

Using your same logic, tell me how it improves their relationship by being married?

Using your same logic, tell me how it improves their relationship by being married?

 

Improve whose relationship? Having gay people marry and creating a solid contribution to society is the same behind what the government promotes w/ heterosexual marriage. It creates another option for adoption which will help with welfare, health costs. The only downfall is that it is pugnant against religious beliefs. I get sick watching rednecks have 6 kids with 4 different men, none of whom ever get married. How does barring gay marriage do anything to remedy that?

Improve whose relationship? Having gay people marry and creating a solid contribution to society is the same behind what the government promotes w/ heterosexual marriage. It creates another option for adoption which will help with welfare, health costs. The only downfall is that it is pugnant against religious beliefs. I get sick watching rednecks have 6 kids with 4 different men, none of whom ever get married. How does barring gay marriage do anything to remedy that?

 

 

I would say that homosexuals can't reproduce, but apparently that's a bad thing any way with all this talk on abortions and the like.

I would say that homosexuals can't reproduce, but apparently that's a bad thing any way with all this talk on abortions and the like.

 

No kidding, it's getting pretty morbid.

No kidding, it's getting pretty morbid.

 

That's it.....how could I have been so blind....the dems are trying to wipe out the human race by promoting abortions and homosexuality. Nooooooo!!!!!!!!!

Improve whose relationship? Having gay people marry and creating a solid contribution to society is the same behind what the government promotes w/ heterosexual marriage. It creates another option for adoption which will help with welfare, health costs. The only downfall is that it is pugnant against religious beliefs. I get sick watching rednecks have 6 kids with 4 different men, none of whom ever get married. How does barring gay marriage do anything to remedy that?

 

So, how does one's (bolded) horrible choices justify homosexual marriage. Not following that logic.

 

So gay people cannot create a solid contribution to society with being married? Is that what you are saying?

 

I do not think homosexual couples should be an option for adoption.

 

And it is NOT my religiouf beliefs that it is against. It is God's word.

So, how does one's (bolded) horrible choices justify homosexual marriage. Not following that logic.

 

So gay people cannot create a solid contribution to society with being married? Is that what you are saying?

 

I do not think homosexual couples should be an option for adoption.

 

And it is NOT my religiouf beliefs that it is against. It is God's word.

 

If you believe the Bible is really God's word. That's another argument for another time.

 

I never said that homosexuals couldn't contribute solidly w/out marriage, however marriage, and it's financial benefits would help greatly. In terms of gay adoption, you don't think that two loving parents is better than a parent who doesn't want, or can't handle their child?

If you believe the Bible is really God's word. That's another argument for another time.

 

I never said that homosexuals couldn't contribute solidly w/out marriage, however marriage, and it's financial benefits would help greatly. In terms of gay adoption, you don't think that two loving parents is better than a parent who doesn't want, or can't handle their child?

 

Didn't say that.

I think a father and mother is the best option.

If you believe the Bible is really God's word. That's another argument for another time.

 

I never said that homosexuals couldn't contribute solidly w/out marriage, however marriage, and it's financial benefits would help greatly. In terms of gay adoption, you don't think that two loving parents is better than a parent who doesn't want, or can't handle their child?[/QUOTE]

 

 

See, I'm a realist, and I say that the child is going to be just as messed up either way. Seriously, can you imagine the jokes that the poor kid has to put up with, especially when he gets to middle school/high school. That reason alone should be enough to keep homosexuals from marrying and adopting in my opinion.

If you believe the Bible is really God's word. That's another argument for another time.

 

I never said that homosexuals couldn't contribute solidly w/out marriage, however marriage, and it's financial benefits would help greatly. In terms of gay adoption, you don't think that two loving parents is better than a parent who doesn't want, or can't handle their child?

 

Absolutely, I believe the Bible is the Word of God.

 

Financially, it has been shown that they can do things to handle those areas without being married.

Absolutely, I believe the Bible is the Word of God.

 

Financially, it has been shown that they can do things to handle those areas without being married.

 

Really, like adopt one another to make one a dependent? They don't receive health benefits, death benefits, loss of consortium, property rights.

If you believe the Bible is really God's word. That's another argument for another time.

 

I never said that homosexuals couldn't contribute solidly w/out marriage, however marriage, and it's financial benefits would help greatly. In terms of gay adoption, you don't think that two loving parents is better than a parent who doesn't want, or can't handle their child?[/QUOTE]

 

 

See, I'm a realist, and I say that the child is going to be just as messed up either way. Seriously, can you imagine the jokes that the poor kid has to put up with, especially when he gets to middle school/high school. That reason alone should be enough to keep homosexuals from marrying and adopting in my opinion.

 

So we shouldn't pass laws out of the fear that there is the possibility that kids will be made fun of? I admit, I haven't read any of the studies that the Indiana's supreme court cited, but the court, who ruled against same sex marriage, ceded that they bared out that kids weren't as messed up as one would think and in fact did just as well as kids raised by a hetero couple.