What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Ron Paul 2008 Revolution

  • Thread starter zappafan
  • Start date
  • #121
yah know what outsiders..................no one is asking you to allow gays to marry in your church.............it DOES NOT affect you............you just dont like the idea of it. yah know what ive got zero problems with church and the like, i was married in a Lutheran church. my stepdaughters attend sunday school there. i have my own issues with god but thats between me and him and i dont let that affect my wifes or my kids relationship with him............so sit down shut up, dont allow gays in your church but if they want to be married in their own beliefs let them. IT DOES NOT AFFECT YOU!
 
  • #122
Just as you are standing up for your religious beliefs, gays and gay supporters are standing up for our civil rights beliefs. If they are truly assaulting God, then you should take comfort in knowing that God will be the one to deal with them. It's not your place to police the world to your religion, that's God's place.
 
  • #123
i dont want someone telling me i cant smoke a funny smellin cigarette

A pipe dream as it appears. I sympathize with you on this one, though I am not a smoker of any kind.
 
  • #124
her's a question.......................how many women do you intimatly know? i do not me in a sexual way either. i mean how many women do you know on a very personal level? how many guys?

i can think of two women i know very intimatly personally, out of the half dozen ill say i do know very well, one is my wife, one is a good friend i helped through a very difficult time just being a good friend and a shoulder to cry on. these two women are damn near polar opposites. anatomically they are the same sure.....psychologically speaking they are as different as men and women. both are quite capable parents and their kids show it. one is a very prissy lady the other will knock you on your rear when and if the mood strikes her, she acts more like one of the guys than one of the girls. infact has very few women friends cause she cant stand the catty BS that goes on in most womens circles.

I don't think it takes an intimate relationship with either sex to determine that women are completely different than men. Obviously no two women are not going to be the same, neither are any two men. That's not what I asked you. You've lived life more than I have and I'm sure you know the difference between a man and a woman, besides anatomically. Men and women think differently, act differently, are interested in different things, have different needs, and most importantly parent differently.

by and large your reasoning makes no sense Outsiders. by your reasoning single parents should not be allowed to keep their kids unless the immediately remarry.

I guess if you think women and men are the same, you could not understand where I'm coming from. You were raised my a man and a woman right? Your personal experience with your mother and father should be enough to understand where I'm coming from. I never said single parents shouldn't be allowed to keep their kids, that's your reasoning. I said that the single parents are lacking just as a gay couple would be lacking.

face it you are letting your personal religious beliefs cloud your judgments. i dont have any beef with your religious beliefs....i know they are extreamly important to some ppl and thats fine. i have no problem. but your trying to force your ideals on a world thats f'ed up and they are not going to work for every situation.

Who's judgments are clouded, you think women and men are the same?! As for forcing my ideals, who's forcing what? Why is it when someone who has faith puts up a good argument, all the sudden I'm trying to force my ideals upon you! Pot, kettle, black?

my best advise to you is to know your beliefs, practice your beliefs but all in all gay marriage is not going to affect you.....it might affect your sensibilities but it will not affect you personally

So you're saying that I should silence myself, and my opinion in on issue because I have faith in God? Everyone has faith in something, and everyone is preaching something you're just blind to it until to you see the words "God, Jesus, or faith".
 
  • #125
So you're saying that I should silence myself, and my opinion in on issue because I have faith in God? Everyone has faith in something, and everyone is preaching something you're just blind to it until to you see the words "God, Jesus, or faith".

Yes. The United States is founded partly on freedom of religion. It may be ungodly for homosexuals to marry, but it is un-American to let your religion influence the government.
 
  • #126
yah know what outsiders..................no one is asking you to allow gays to marry in your church.............it DOES NOT affect you............you just dont like the idea of it. yah know what ive got zero problems with church and the like, i was married in a Lutheran church. my stepdaughters attend sunday school there. i have my own issues with god but thats between me and him and i dont let that affect my wifes or my kids relationship with him............so sit down shut up, dont allow gays in your church but if they want to be married in their own beliefs let them. IT DOES NOT AFFECT YOU!

What does this worthless rant have anything to do with gays getting married at my church? Why would I prevent gays from coming to my church, you obviously don't understand what you're saying. This topic is about the next presidential candidates and the current issues on the table, and how people are going to vote. I'm an American citizen and I have the right to voice my opinion and cast my vote how I feel is best for America. I'm sorry if you can't deal with the fact on top of this I have faith in God and that a piece of the marriage issue deals with my faith. I understand that not everyone shares my faith nor do I try to shove it down their throat or tell them to shut up because they don't agree with me. That's just immature, plain rude and disrespectful. That is why I only posted one time throughout this whole thread about how faith plays a role in this issue and it was addressed to JLAP.
 
  • #127
Yes. The United States is founded partly on freedom of religion. It may be ungodly for homosexuals to marry, but it is un-American to let your religion influence the government.

Does anyone else find it hilarious that in a thread that talks about rights and freedoms that people here want to silence me and discriminate against me because I have faith in God?
 
  • #128
We're Americans here. We want you to have your religion separate from our government. You can have all the religious beliefs you want when you go to church. But when you're voting you should keep in mind that you're trying to promote American ideals, not Catholic ones. Again, God makes the rules that you're trying to enforce. Let Him deal with gays.
 
  • #129
Outsiders, you've done a great job, and have not brought your religious beliefs into this. Kudos. I wouldn't bother debating someone unless I have respect for them, and I have respect for you. I ask you to consider two things:

1) We don't even have civil unions in most places. In fact, Bush tried to change the Constitution to deny even civil unions (so much for state's rights). This is why people are suspicious of not just outright allowing gay marriage, because they already face blatant legal discrimination. Full equality is what they're after, and they're not even getting close, thanks to anti-gay beliefs in this country.

2) The definition of marriage is something we make up. We decide what it means and what it says. It wasn't handed down on some magic stone tablets. It's written, decided, and defined by people just like you and me, so it's confusing why you keep referring to it like it's some sacred concept. It's a legal contract with the state that gives benefits based on what's good for families. That applies to all families, doesn't it? Why have two names (or ten) for the same concept?

Capslock
 
  • #130
Just as you are standing up for your religious beliefs, gays and gay supporters are standing up for our civil rights beliefs.

This isn't about civil rights, we've been through this many times.

If they are truly assaulting God, then you should take comfort in knowing that God will be the one to deal with them.

The point I was trying to make is that no one is sympathetic to the fact that there's an assault on an institution of God going on here as well. I will not take comfort for I wish no one to be condemned.

It's not your place to police the world to your religion, that's God's place.

It's not your place alone to decide where this country is headed, nor your place to tell me what to do! You cannot command me.
 
  • #131
number one your assuming i come from a normal cheery household. i am a product of my parents and my curious nature nothing more, nothing less......was raised by my mother and my father.....i was not abused but things were far from perfect. ive seen ppl turn out perfect fine from single parent households mainly women raising sons. is there something lacking? sure, but often times it would have been worse if both were together. or hell it can be lacking in a normal household too. your arguing isnt making sense. single parent households are lacking but ok......gay couple households are lacking but not ok? WTF? and yes it takes intimate relationships to get insight on the opposite sex, hell it takes them for real incite on the same sex. as i said by intimate i do not in any way mean sexual. sex has nothing to do with it......getting ppl through the chitty parts that make up life does.

Men and women think differently, act differently, are interested in different things, have different needs, and most importantly parent differently.

to this i respond..............get out more. my wife and i are interested in all the same things, i just take it to a different level than her, has nothing to do with her being woman and me a man, has to do with the fact she is to wrapped up in work to get as distracted in things as i do. its her and my natures.........ive seen women be the discipling parent and ive seen men be it. ive seen men being the comforter aswell.

i dont think men and women are the same............i think each and every person is an individual. subject to their own wants and desires that may or may not make sence to me.........segregating them into different sexes is FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR from enough categories..........i have no issues with you worshiping as you please just like i have no issues with two gay ppl getting married and raising a kid. neither turn my crank but im willing to let things be cause they do not affect me..........

as i said i have issues with god, but one thing i do know from the bible is in the end it is between an individual and his maker and nothing else. some other individual believing different than i do in no way affects what will happen to me when i die. i firmly believe that. which is why im willing to live and let live to any individual aslong as they allow me and my family to do the same
 
  • #132
We're Americans here. We want you to have your religion separate from our government.

What makes you think it's solely your government?

You can have all the religious beliefs you want when you go to church. But when you're voting you should keep in mind that you're trying to promote American ideals, not Catholic ones.

What gives you the right to take your beliefs to the voting booth? Who decides what America's ideals are? Thanks for the laugh but I'm not Catholic, nor belong to a religion.

Again, God makes the rules that you're trying to enforce. Let Him deal with gays.

You obviously don't know what God does do or doesn't do so please spare me the pain.
 
  • #133
I suppose I assumed you were Catholic, when you linked us to catholic propaganda about gay marriage. And if you're not religious, why are you wearing a religion suit?

I can tell you one of America's ideals: separation of church and state. That's for sure. Keep in mind that whenever a religiously affected law is made, it directly outrages another religion (or non-religion). Keeping your spiritual beliefs out of our government is essential to a more peaceful coexistence.
 
  • #134
I suppose I assumed you were Catholic, when you linked us to catholic propaganda about gay marriage. And if you're not religious, why are you wearing a religion suit?

I can tell you one of America's ideals: separation of church and state. That's for sure. Keep in mind that whenever a religiously affected law is made, it directly outrages another religion (or non-religion). Keeping your spiritual beliefs out of our government is essential to a more peaceful coexistence.

for the record the founding fathers werent for the strict seperation of church and state in everything government.......infact the were heavy in believing in faith........what the founding fathers were against was a state sponcered religion like what was going on in Europe at the time......to often the top religious ppl became as powerful as who were supposed to be the leaders of the country...........that is what they apposed cause its kinda hard to force the election of a religious leader at regular intervals.........Washington and Jefferson are spinning in their grave over the removal of god from anything government.....they ment for the god to be what ever the individual wanted and most definatly would approve of the ten commandments being displayed at congress. they had no issues with faith in government, they just didnt want state sponcered religion..............
 
  • #135
That's true. But you have to admit, that with changing times, the ideas that were back then have more tolerant counterparts these days that are still derived from the same concept.
 
  • #136
tollerant? removing the referance of "god" from everything government isnt tollerance..............its PC BS.........and nothing more.
 
  • #137
Outsiders, you've done a great job, and have not brought your religious beliefs into this. Kudos. I wouldn't bother debating someone unless I have respect for them, and I have respect for you. I ask you to consider two things:

Thanks for the kind words, I respect everyone on here to regardless of our differences.

1) We don't even have civil unions in most places. In fact, Bush tried to change the Constitution to deny even civil unions (so much for state's rights). This is why people are suspicious of not just outright allowing gay marriage, because they already face blatant legal discrimination. Full equality is what they're after, and they're not even getting close, thanks to anti-gay beliefs in this country.

I'm sure the gays are suffering many disparities and I wish this country would do something about. Bush probably isn't going to be the guy to get the job done unfortunately. I honestly believe the best solution here is to create civil unions that allow gays to have the EXACT same legal rights as a married heterosexual couple. There's no reason they shouldn't have the same legal rights, except when they want to term it "gay marriage", this is where the problem is. Either way, setting up civil unions with legal rights is a step in the right direction for the gay community.

2) The definition of marriage is something we make up. We decide what it means and what it says. It wasn't handed down on some magic stone tablets. It's written, decided, and defined by people just like you and me, so it's confusing why you keep referring to it like it's some sacred concept. It's a legal contract with the state that gives benefits based on what's good for families. That applies to all families, doesn't it? Why have two names (or ten) for the same concept?

Capslock

We can't makeup the definition of marriage, it's existed LONG before we were even conceived. As for its origins we can agree to disagree. Surely today we both could make up a definition for marriage but that's not the issue at hand here. What is trying to be done today is modify the core definition of marriage here that has always been between one man and one woman. As far back in time you can trace it, it's always been that way, between one man and one woman regardless of faith. What right do we have to change the definition of an institution that has always been between a man and a woman? Just because today we feel like editing it? It just irrational and illogical to change the meaning of a word that has always meant ONE thing. It is also illogical to claim that marriage is the same thing as "gay marriage". If you claim that, then why the division for homosexuals and heterosexuals? The reason is because they are two different things. Just as we are talking about here. The only logical solution is to give gay couples the same legal rights and call it something else. I don't honestly know what gays who commit to each other want to be called. Civil union? The premise that gays won't feel equal because they aren't called a marriage is because that's the truth. The two unions are not the same and that shouldn't matter as long as both get the same rights under the law.
 
  • #138
I suppose I assumed you were Catholic, when you linked us to catholic propaganda about gay marriage.

I didn't realize the site was from a catholic source, just google searched and that was the first thing that popped up that shared some of my issues.

And if you're not religious, why are you wearing a religion suit?

I don't understand you question...

I can tell you one of America's ideals: separation of church and state. That's for sure. Keep in mind that whenever a religiously affected law is made, it directly outrages another religion (or non-religion). Keeping your spiritual beliefs out of our government is essential to a more peaceful coexistence.

You have beliefs and faith just as I and you are preaching the same, you just have beliefs and faith in a different source. Once again what makes your beliefs the right ones for this country, because they favor your lifestyle?
 
  • #139
They are not different things in any way that particularly matters.
 
  • #140
tollerant? removing the referance of "god" from everything government isnt tollerance..............its PC BS.........and nothing more.

Then why isn't it intolerant to remove the "one man and one woman" from the definition of marriage? This is exactly the same kind of bogus.

Just like Christmas trees are now being called Holiday Trees...
 
Back
Top