What I think:
Who cares if people are gay, seriously, its their choice, not yours. If they like men and they are a guy, leave them alone. I have a lot of friends that are gay or bi. I can name about 3 off the top of my head. If these people want to get married, you still should not have a right to tell them no. Earlier in the topic people were talking about emos. There's nothing wrong with emos, hey even I am kind of emo. i have long hair that covers my eyes, I listen to some music with screaming in it, and I'm still a normal person, half you people wouldn't even know this by talking to me on TDC.
But seriously, let people do what they want, That is like someone telling you that you are not allowed to be with your wife/girlfriend, even though you love them, your not allowed to get married to them.
Doesn't seem right does it?
Sure marriage might have started from religious ceremonies, but in religion don't they teach acceptance? Judging people by there sexuality is NOT acceptance.
Your just jealous that you're not as awesome as me.
(And my megaman avatar )
But seriously, let people do what they want, That is like someone telling you that you are not allowed to be with your wife/girlfriend, even though you love them, your not allowed to get married to them.
Doesn't seem right does it?
But that's the whole thing. A civil partnership is the same as being married. It brings the exact same benefits from a law and benefit standpoint. It's just that you're not husband and wife and (IIRC) surnames stay put, even in different sex relationships. A marriage is a union between man and woman - it requires a different name to be in a same sex relationship IMO.
Sure marriage might have started from religious ceremonies, but in religion don't they teach acceptance? Judging people by there sexuality is NOT acceptance.
There are limits. In Christianity they teach that if someone steals your coat then you offer then your shirt. But that's just stupid and none of the Christians I know go by that. Just like you can't go into a church, demand that you seek refuge there and later move in as a resident - even though they're supposed to put you up if you need help.
But that's the whole thing. A civil partnership is the same as being married. It brings the exact same benefits from a law and benefit standpoint. It's just that you're not husband and wife and (IIRC) surnames stay put, even in different sex relationships. A marriage is a union between man and woman - it requires a different name to be in a same sex relationship IMO.
Thats not how the laws work though. They recognize Marriages and Civil Unions as separate entities. If that were to be true, the government would have to stop recognizing marriages and ONLY recognize civil unions. Then same sex couples would have the same rights. But right now, theres a variety of things that aren't allowed. For example, if one partner is terminally ill, the other might not be allowed to visit them in the hospital on their deathbed. Imagine telling a man they couldn't do that for their wife.
So no, its not the same, but it should be.
Originally Posted by Dr. James There are limits. In Christianity they teach that if someone steals your coat then you offer then your shirt. But that's just stupid and none of the Christians I know go by that. Just like you can't go into a church, demand that you seek refuge there and later move in as a resident - even though they're supposed to put you up if you need help.
Well those people aren't good Christians then, are they? That whole love thy neighbor and all that jazz, thats optional right? I believe thats called "Cafeteria Christian", or at least it would be, if those same christians didn't use that term to denounce each other in a ridiculously hypocritical manner. Meh. This is why I say, religion doesn't make people good, nor does it make them bad. It just complicates things either way.
So you're saying if a Christian is being robbed, that according to their religion they should offer the thieves tea and cake?
If you read the bible or talk to any of the people who properly understand what it's all about they say there are limits, explained in the contradictions of points. "Be good, but rather let people learn to help themselves" etc. Just like it's completely unrealistic to help everyone that needs you, or pay into every charity. It's impossible as we're all only human.
I almost shed a tear googling that. You'd think Cafeteria Christan or A la Carte Catholic would apply to those who call themselves Christians, but forget all the teaches of "Love they neighbor", the 10 commandments, and forgiveness, but all the wikipedia article goes on about is how people use it as a label on those who call themselves Christians but don't follow the strict orders on hating gays & stopping women from having abortions & denouncing evolution. You'd think that for a Christian, that whole direct commandment from Jesus saying "Love thy neighbor" would trump something john or whoever said 3rd hand immediately before saying "Thou shalt not eat shrimp".
Originally Posted by Dr. James So you're saying if a Christian is being robbed, that according to their religion they should offer the thieves tea and cake?
If you read the bible or talk to any of the people who properly understand what it's all about they say there are limits, explained in the contradictions of points. "Be good, but rather let people learn to help themselves" etc. Just like it's completely unrealistic to help everyone that needs you, or pay into every charity. It's impossible as we're all only human.
Actually yes, thats exactly what Jesus said. I'm no expert on bible studies, but its pretty hard to interpret "Turn the other cheek" as "Shoot the guy whos robbing your house to feed his starving family" Now ask yourself, if you went back in time and punched Mohandas Ghandi in the gut, would he turn around and put you in a headlock, or would he forgive you? Yeah its a pretty unrealistic expectation of anyone. But doing it is what makes you a good person, instead of just "another human". Thats the entire point of the religion.
On the subject of christianity -- I don't understand why a person would bother adhering to only some Biblical values. Someone would use christianity to justify homophobia, but will not even "turn thy other cheek"? Dr. James, being "only human" isn't enough in that case, because gays who "don't seek help" are only human, and then the whole cycle is hypocritical. A Tibetan monk always restrains 'unpleasant' emotions such as anger and hate (which is not easy), and they are as human as us. Basically, it's fine to call yourself a christian or whatever else, but don't use religion as an excuse for bigotry, especially if you are only religious when it is convenient.
One might also look at religion through a practical lens. "Be fruitful and multiply" was an important concept back then, and a quick way to mobilize a religion. Today, it might be the opposite; for example, the one child law in China. Perhaps a modern Bible would eliminate clauses on sexual preference, or even advocate homosexuality as a way to prevent overpopulation. Homophobia today holds neither philisophical nor practical value.
People really just follow their religion when it benefits them. More people would kill in the name of their god than die in it. They buy into the whole turn the other cheek thing up until its their turn. Frankly, its because religion has absolutely nothing to do with it. Good people exist, bad people exist. Being a christian or a muslim or a sikh or a jedi knight makes no difference either way on your morality, although religious differences sure have persisted since antiquity as one of the larger causes of death in this world.
It still doesn't explain why God makes them gay in the first place, it doesn't seem fair he gives some people the disadvantage of being gay and having to seek help to get straight. Why would he do that?
Okay, let me correct myself, that didn't come out how i meant it to. it's not particularly god's choosing, it's kinda the environment we were brought up in, but God gives you the power to change.
Advertisement
)
Edited by the Author.
