Obama endorses same-sex marriage (Page 7)

I think therein lies the dilemma.  

I agree with you that this is the crux of it.

Myself, I don't see it as a dilemma.
 

These threads just make my head pound.

I don't understand why it matters to anyone what anyone else wishes to do in their personal lives.

Would it matter to you if I ate a ham sandwich today? Or are you going to insist that I eat a turkey sandwich today? What bearing does it have on you? What business is it of yours?

Why can't human beings be allowed to marry who they want? SS couples are not asking to marry YOU personally. They want to marry each other. Just like I'm not shoving my ham sandwich down YOUR throat. It's my sandwich. And it's their marriage.

I. just. don't. understand. WHY does it matter to anyone else what a couple of consenting adults decide to do with their lives and futures?

And I'm telling you: Jesus, if he's the guy we all purport him to be, would be genuinely happy that two people found love in each other, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, whatever. He was, by all reports, a loving guy. He wanted peace amongst his people. He favored kindness. At least that's what we've all been lead to believe all these years.

So do you really believe that he'd want to keep people that love each other apart? He'd encourage love. Not discourage it.

I don't get it. The fact that we have this conversation over and over and over again bewilders me.

dontracy - 2012-05-10 12:16 PM

mr2tony -  These issues will never be fully fleshed out because they're a matter of opinion and subject to an individual's religious beliefs. Argue all day long and you will never change anybody's mind. I personally think these threads are kind of a way for people to pump up themselves and say ``look at how much I know.'' But they sure can be entertaining. I give this one, however, a four out of 10.

Well those arguments changed my mind.
I was in support of gay marriage before being in support of gay marriage was cool.
The facts of the argument won out though and swayed my opinion.

That's what having an open mind is suppose to be about after all.
Isn't it? 

On top of knowing how much I don't know, I'm no entertainer,
so if that's what this thread is about I've got nothing to add.

Glad you italicized that word Don. 

Ha!  I went to find the "like" button for your post and then realized that there isn't one.  

X2

Sorry.  The people we elect these days say compromise = losing.  Gotta be all or nothing for everyone all the time in everything.

I don't think it is just our politicians that are that way look at some of this thread from both sides.  Neither wants to acknowledge any little bit of valid point from the other.

really?

gender and race aren't sins.  who and what you have sex with are.  there's lots to be said about the love of Jesus.  there's also a lot to be said about his holiness.  yes, Jesus died for our sexual sins too, whether committed between heterosexuals, homosexuals, married and unmarried.   

I will acknowledge religious freedom, and a church's right to not conduct a marriage ceremony, and their right to speak out against homosexuality, and their right to ban "sinners" from their ranks, but what valid point is there in the strictly legal argument of denying homosexual couples the same rights provided under law to heterosexual couples? I've yet to hear a valid point on that specifically. 

I asked this same question a few hours ago and didn't get an answer either.  I'm still looking for a non religious reason.  

For me, the arguments from the other side are based entirely in religion. IMO, any argument suffixed with "... because that's what my religion teaches" is an invalid argument, because there is no basis in provable fact behind it. They hold up a book written over 3,000 years ago, written by men who sought to control people, and point to it as some sort of source of truth.

There has been no secular-based reason given here whatsoever.

You might as well tell me "... because the letters in my alphabet soup rearranged themselves to spell 'no gay marriage' " and I would give the same weight to that argument as I would a religious one.

I get that people are anti-gay marriage because that's what their religion instructs them to do. They're entitled to that opinion and they can privately practice their religion as they see fit. I am also entitled to disregard such opinions, as they are mine.  

If they actually rearranged themselves I'd give that some serious consideration.

Ha!  fair enough!  

I still can't get over the fact that it this all boils down to religious viewpoints being applied as the standard for establishment of civil law. No, no, a thousand times no.

Theocracies are by their very nature repressive. Why do we wish to become what we as a nation proclaim to the rest of the world to be unjust?

When did these words become hollow and devoid of meaning?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Yes, really.

"Jesus loves me*, this I know, for the Bible tells me so..."

*unless I happen to be GLBT. Then, Jesus says... "nope not you."

But he'll love me if I'm a thief, a rapist, a cheat, an alduterer? But he WON'T love me if I'm a girl that loves another girl? Or a boy that loves another boy? Really?

I don't know, man. I really don't. I'm no religious scholar... I never could find a religion that fit my view of the world, so I gave it up in favor of a "DO UNTO OTHERS" mentality.

I just think that what two other people do with each other has no bearing on what I do. Unless those two other people are holding me down and robbing me, in which case Jesus would forgive them. Unless they're gay.

Amen, sista.

I have way too many of my own issues to sort out without sticking my nose in anyone else's life.

I have been divorced, twice. It is absolutely NOT something I am proud of in any way, but I mention that because despite that fact, I could walk into any number of churches today and get married again. (Not *any* church, of course...I am aware there are also some that would refuse to marry me, which is fine.) I just don't get why those who are opposed to gay marriage are not equally as up in arms about me... Believe me, I am well aware that there are those in my family/church/social circle that disapprove of how my life has gone so far. (It certainly isn't what I had in mind, either.) But I don't see anyone (outside of the Phelps-type extremists) protesting and proposing legislation that I not be able to get married again.

I know this is combing Whizzz's post with the other "which sin is worse?" question, but the sentiment is still the same--it makes my head hurt too.

(edited to correct spelling)

Jesus died for our sins. Was he successful? We still sin.  At least he got Christ consciousness out of it. 

I asked the question yesterday but no reply

*sigh* knew I should have stayed out.  Whether you agree with the other side some of the arguments have been valid.  Do they rise to a level of justification for this law in my opinion... no!   But I am not so closed minded that I refuse to see or acknowledge that the otherside has some points that would give me pause were I them.  If you think the government can never tell a religious institution that they must do something to which they are moraly oppsed you have not been paying attention.

I'd love to point you to something you would think is concrete but I can't produce that. I fully believe that the Bible is perfect in its current form, inspired by the Holy Spirit, and is interpreted by the same Holy Spirit that dwells in Christians.

We are all born sinners, (romans 3:23, psalm 51:5) don't believe me? look at a kid, no one has to teach your precious 2 year old to be selfish, or to hit bite and defy you, or to be greedy. God is perfect and Holy, and our best works we can do to approach him are as "filthy rags" (isaiah 64:6). Jesus came to the earth incarnate, fully man, fully God; to live the life we could not live, and to die the death we should have died, in our place.

In Genesis before sin entered the world, Adam was alone, God saw that it was not good for Adam to be alone, and He created a wife for Adam, She was created using a rib from Adam, this symbolizes the 2 working alongside each other as Eve was created as a helper to Adam. Someone else pointed out Genesis 2:24 which says "therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh." This is marriage. Period. Civil unions and the such slap marriage, as God created it, in the face. Romans 1:24-28 speak to this I won't copy the whole thing, but in verse 26-27 it says "women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error." - this is not my interpretation, this is not my "cardinal, my neighbors pastor, or the rapture guy"'s interpretation, This is the Word of God.

I am not saying that we should legislate morality, it can not and will not work. I do not care one iota what you do and who you do it with. I do not have to answer for your decisions and choices. and yes i said choice, you must answer for that. In Romans 1:28 God says "and since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what out not be done." 

I'm with you in spirit; I get that they have deeply seated, well developed reasons for their position. They have valid points from their perspective and "if I were them" those points would cause me pause. But I'm not, and they don't. Maybe it's a semantics debate on the meaning of valid.

Nope... just looked up valid at dictionary.com.