RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage?

RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Carmeldelight -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/9/2010 11:40:14 PM)
An examination of family pedigrees revealed that gay men had more homosexual male relatives through maternal than through paternal lineages, suggesting a linkage to the X chromosome. Dean Hamer23 found such an association at region Xq28. If male sexual orientation was influenced by a gene on Xq28, then gay brothers should share more than 50% of their alleles at this region, whereas their heterosexual brothers should share less than 50% of their alleles. In the absence of such an association, then both types of brothers should display 50% allele sharing. An analysis of 40 pairs of gay brothers and found that they shared 82% of their alleles in the Xq28 region, which was much greater than the 50% allele sharing that would be expected by chance.24 However, a follow-up study by the same research group, using 32 pairs of gay brothers and found only 67% allele sharing, which was much closer to the 50% expected by chance.25 Attempts by Rice et al. to repeat the Hamer study resulted in only 46% allele sharing, insignificantly different from chance, contradicting the Hamer results.26 At the same time, an unpublished study by Alan Sanders (University of Chicago) corroborated the Rice results.27 Ultimately, no gene or gene product from the Xq28 region was ever identified that affected sexual orientation. When Jonathan Marks (an evolutionary biologist) asked Hamer what percentage of homosexuality he thought his results explained, his answer was that he thought it explained 5% of male homosexuality. Marks' response was, "There is no science other than behavioral genetics in which you can leave 97.5% of a phenomenon unexplained and get headlines."28 Sexual preference or orientation? If homosexual orientation were completely genetic, one would expect that it would not change over the course of one's life. For females, sexual preference does seem to change over time. A 5-year study of lesbians found that over a quarter of these women relinquished their lesbian/bisexual identities during this period: half reclaimed heterosexual identities and half gave up all identity labels.29 In a survey of young minority women (16-23 years of age), half of the participants changed their sexual identities more than once during the two-year survey period.30 In another study of subjects who were recruited from organizations that serve lesbian/gay/bisexual youths (ages 14 to 21 years) in New York City, the percentage that changed from a lesbian/gay/bisexual orientation to a heterosexual orientation was 5% over the period of just 12 months (the length of the survey).31 Other studies have confirmed that sexual orientation is not fixed in all individuals, but can change over time, especially in women.32 A recent example of an orientation change occurred with The Advocate's "Person of the Year" for 2005. Kerry Pacer was the youngest gay advocate, chosen for her initiation of a "gay-straight alliance" at White County High School in Cleveland, Georgia. However, four years later, she is raising her one year old daughter, along with the baby's father.33 Obviously, for at least some individuals, being gay or straight is something they can choose. It always amazes me when people say that they were born gay. Looking back on my own experience, I would never say that I was "born straight." I really didn't have any interest in females until about the seventh grade. Before that time, they weren't really interesting, since they weren't interested in sports or riding bikes or anything else I liked to do. Homosexuality and Darwinism I am not a huge fan of Neo Darwinian evolution. Nevertheless, there is some clear evidence that natural selection (and sexual selection) does act upon populations and has acted on our own species to produce racial differences.34 Natural selection postulates that those genetic mutations that favor survival and reproduction will be selected, whereas those that compromise survival and reproduction will be eliminated. Obviously, a gene or series of genes that produce non-reproducing individuals (i.e., those who express pure homosexual behavior) will be rapidly eliminated from any population. So, it would be expected that any "gay gene" would be efficiently removed from a population. However, it is possible that a gene favoring male homosexuality could "hide" within the human genome if it were located on the X-chromosome, where it could be carried by reproducing females, and not be subject to negative selection by non-reproducing males. In order to survive, the gene(s) would be expected to be associated with higher reproductive capacity in women who carry it (compensating for the generation of non-reproducing males). I can't imagine a genetic scenario in which female homosexuality would ever persist within a population.

AquaticSub -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/9/2010 11:41:26 PM)
Ok... the enter button is your friend and turns into a huge block of text into readable paragraphs.

Carmeldelight -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/9/2010 11:46:09 PM)
if you are going to adopt please get a child from America that is if your background is not messed up. i am tired of people going over seas to get a baby. there are plenty of children right here who needs a good home.

AquaticSub -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/9/2010 11:53:54 PM)
Ok... just because I'm nice I'm gonna try and wade through this nearly unreadable mess. But seriously... learn to use the enter key ok? It's hard to take you seriously at all when you don't. quote: ORIGINAL: Carmeldelight An examination of family pedigrees revealed that gay men had more homosexual male relatives through maternal than through paternal lineages, suggesting a linkage to the X chromosome. Dean Hamer23 found such an association at region Xq28. If male sexual orientation was influenced by a gene on Xq28, then gay brothers should share more than 50% of their alleles at this region, whereas their heterosexual brothers should share less than 50% of their alleles. In the absence of such an association, then both types of brothers should display 50% allele sharing. An analysis of 40 pairs of gay brothers and found that they shared 82% of their alleles in the Xq28 region, which was much greater than the 50% allele sharing that would be expected by chance.24 However, a follow-up study by the same research group, using 32 pairs of gay brothers and found only 67% allele sharing, which was much closer to the 50% expected by chance.25 Attempts by Rice et al. to repeat the Hamer study resulted in only 46% allele sharing, insignificantly different from chance, contradicting the Hamer results.26 At the same time, an unpublished study by Alan Sanders (University of Chicago) corroborated the Rice results.27 Ultimately, no gene or gene product from the Xq28 region was ever identified that affected sexual orientation. When Jonathan Marks (an evolutionary biologist) asked Hamer what percentage of homosexuality he thought his results explained, his answer was that he thought it explained 5% of male homosexuality. Marks' response was, "There is no science other than behavioral genetics in which you can leave 97.5% of a phenomenon unexplained and get headlines."28 Sexual preference or orientation? If homosexual orientation were completely genetic, one would expect that it would not change over the course of one's life. For females, sexual preference does seem to change over time. Above studies were on males and therefore do not apply to women. You'd have to run the same DNA studies on lesbians. quote: A 5-year study of lesbians found that over a quarter of these women relinquished their lesbian/bisexual identities during this period: half reclaimed heterosexual identities and half gave up all identity labels.29 A bisexual can be quite happy in a monogamous relationship with a man therefore it's entirely possible for her to simply ignore any desire for a woman. A lesbian, like any homosexual wishing to avoid people like you, can "fake it". I doubt this study takes this into account. BTW - are you aware that most of the "make me not gay anymore" programs are utter failures and a great place to meet gay men for sex? I'll have to dig out a book I have on the programs written by a man who went through them for research. quote: In a survey of young minority women (16-23 years of age), half of the participants changed their sexual identities more than once during the two-year survey period.30 In another study of subjects who were recruited from organizations that serve lesbian/gay/bisexual youths (ages 14 to 21 years) in New York City, the percentage that changed from a lesbian/gay/bisexual orientation to a heterosexual orientation was 5% over the period of just 12 months (the length of the survey).31 Other studies have confirmed that sexual orientation is not fixed in all individuals, but can change over time, especially in women.32 A recent example of an orientation change occurred with The Advocate's "Person of the Year" for 2005. Kerry Pacer was the youngest gay advocate, chosen for her initiation of a "gay-straight alliance" at White County High School in Cleveland, Georgia. However, four years later, she is raising her one year old daughter, along with the baby's father.33 Obviously, for at least some individuals, being gay or straight is something they can choose. People can, for their own reasons, choose to ignore their sexuality. You, a devout person, should be aware of this as monks and nuns have chosen to do so a long, long time. A person can also find that they are bisexual when they believed they were one or the other. quote: It always amazes me when people say that they were born gay. Looking back on my own experience, I would never say that I was "born straight." I really didn't have any interest in females until about the seventh grade. Before that time, they weren't really interesting, since they weren't interested in sports or riding bikes or anything else I liked to do. And obviously your personal experiences should be everyone's. I was masturabating while in diapers and never experienced any period in which I wasn't sexual and didn't want to have sexual relationships. I also was never molested or beaten in any way and I had great relationship with my parents. quote: Homosexuality and Darwinism I am not a huge fan of Neo Darwinian evolution. Nevertheless, there is some clear evidence that natural selection (and sexual selection) does act upon populations and has acted on our own species to produce racial differences.34 Natural selection postulates that those genetic mutations that favor survival and reproduction will be selected, whereas those that compromise survival and reproduction will be eliminated. Obviously, a gene or series of genes that produce non-reproducing individuals (i.e., those who express pure homosexual behavior) will be rapidly eliminated from any population. So, it would be expected that any "gay gene" would be efficiently removed from a population. A faulty deduction at best. Redheads were considered undesirable at one point and even burned at the stake in some cases yet they continue to exist. It's possible that it's a very recessive trait but even recessive traits that cause sterility still exist in the human population and have not been bred out. quote: However, it is possible that a gene favoring male homosexuality could "hide" within the human genome if it were located on the X-chromosome, where it could be carried by reproducing females, and not be subject to negative selection by non-reproducing males. In order to survive, the gene(s) would be expected to be associated with higher reproductive capacity in women who carry it (compensating for the generation of non-reproducing males). I can't imagine a genetic scenario in which female homosexuality would ever persist within a population. See above. Even genetic mutations that cause sterility have been around and kicking for hundreds of years.

AquaticSub -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/9/2010 11:56:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Carmeldelight if you are going to adopt please get a child from America that is if your background is not messed up. i am tired of people going over seas to get a baby. there are plenty of children right here who needs a good home. Have you ever tried to adopt an American child? Are you aware that the birth parents, even after giving the kid up, can sometimes take the kid back? Can you imagine the emotional turmoil of waiting so long, working so hard, paying so much, being so happy, holding your baby in your arms... just to have it taken away? This is part of why my in-laws adopted a baby from overseas. It's part of why I'm considering it too. I will check to see if the laws have changed but if they haven't... I'm not putting myself or my owner through that. You want to see more kids adopted here in the states? Worry less about the adults who are consenting to get married and worry more about the kids who aren't consenting to being parentless.

hlen5 -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/9/2010 11:57:45 PM)
I think Tazzy has the right idea about baby steps for the topic. I have some side questions (forgive me for not reading all 5 pages)... Carmeldelight, are you serious about the gay-devil thing, and what do you mean about "if your background is not messed up" to AquaticSub? edited for typo

AquaticSub -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 12:01:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hlen5 what do you mean about "if your background is not messed up" to AquaticSub? Ya know I missed that part. I guess you are only good enough for American kids if you fit in Carmel's perfect little mold. I notice they said "if you are going to adopt" and nothing about how adoption is a such a good thing. [:-]

popeye1250 -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 12:03:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Carmeldelight god did not make people gay.....it is the devils work of being gay!!! case closed Carmelnuget, you're a funny guy. If two men or two women want to be married 200 miles away from you how is that going to affect you? If it makes them happy what on earth is wrong with that? I bet you believe in man made global warming too don't you? You seem very rigid in your thinking.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 3:09:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Its just more paperwork and recognition is completely irrelevant.... The only thing that counts is "standing" within the law, keeping in mind law trumps statutes. We have the infinite right to contract, and that right is possibly the most upheld right people have.......you can even "contract" to "waive" your right if you want. (which is what government regulated marriage does) First of all, what exactly do you think the "law" is? Obviously you don't know, so let me clarify it for you. STATUTES are the laws. When you break a law you are violating a statute. In the United States, MARRIAGE is a legal CONTRACT. You do not have the "infinite" right to contract. You can't contract for things that are illegal, and you can not waive all of your legal rights in all circumstances. When the CONTRACT you have "negotiated" has a problem, and someone wants out of the contract, that is what the LAW does...define whether the parameters of the contract were reasonable and just. So at the end of the contract, if one of the parties is not holding up their end of the agreement, the parties go to Court to assist in the contract being upheld. In other words, you basically have no clue about the legality of a contract and your belief that there is a difference between "law" and "statutes" just solidifies that fact. Not all laws are based in religion. Yes, many "laws" have developed out of religious doctrine, however, as society has evolved, so has the law. When the bible was written, guns did not exist. Gun laws were developed because guns were developed. The "common law" is based on what is for the "common good." Yes, the bible says that murder is wrong, but I don't think there are many people that are going to say that having laws against murder goes against the interests of society. Carmeldelight, You obviously want to represent yourself as a Christian. However, you can not pick and choose which parts of the bible you think are appropriate and which are not. You mention "ass play" in your profile as something you "love." Yet the bible and the religion you are thumping away at says that sodomy is wrong, not simply wrong for homosexual men. Your sexual escapades with various men go against the teaching of the bible. So you know what? According to YOUR beliefs, when you die, you will be burning in hell with all the homosexuals because you are just as deviant as they are. Several people have asked you to back up some of your statements with bibical quotes, which you have continually ignored. Have you even READ the bible? It is very easy to post an article from a website that is called "Evidence for God." However, that would not exactly be an unbiased source for a scientific study now would it? That was a rhetorical question, there is no need for you to answer. If you did, I'm sure you would just spout out more "devil" crap rather than make an intelligent, reasonable response. Many states have Civil Unions, but as already mentioned, they don't give all the rights of marriage that they were designed to do. Insurance companies do not need to recognize a civil union, neither do hospitals. In Germany, a couple has two wedding ceremonies. The civil ceremony and the religious one. I belive England does the same. For all of those who say that marriage is a "religious" concept, how would you feel if the states (because marriage is regulated by the state laws, not the federal laws) said that you no longer had protection under the law? If you wanted to divorce, your church (or synogogue or mosk or whatever) was where you needed to go. There is no more spousal support, child support or equitable division of property. Your church is the only one that can create your marriage and the only one who can dissolve it. Not getting child support? Ask you pastor, priest or rabbi to fix the problem. Won't work very well will it. Those are just a couple of the examples I can think of at six in the morning having not gone to sleep. Instead of adjusting the law to allow for gay marriages, how about if everyone gets a civil union? If you want the legal protection that comes from what is now called "marriage" you have to have a civil ceremony. Everyone who was previously married in a religious ceremony by their pastor, priest or rabbi, your marriage is now invalid. You need to go to your local municipality and have a judge or justice of the peace perform a civil union. Sure, the church will recognize you as being "married" but your insurance company won't recognize anything but a civil union. Social Security only if you have that civil union. Spousal rights under the law only for a civil union. You see, those religious married folks want to protect their rights. As it is so obvious with Carmeldelights posts, those fanatics want to pick and choose what parts of the bible will fit into their agenda. The parts that don't fit, they don't pay attention to. Pro-Lifers seem to think that the bible tells them to bomb abortion clinics and kill to prevent murder (talk about an oxymoron), the terrorists believe the Koran tells them to kill people who don't share their beliefs, Jehovah Witnesses think that you should die rather than get a blood transfusion because the bible tells them so. All of these books were written when these things didn't exist. Slavery was still in existence when the bible was written. Bible thumpers will always wave their bible as "proof" of their point. But the bible has been re-written into modern language. Many of the terms in it didn't even exist when the book was written, and theologic scholars had to interpret what was being said, so the bible as it is written now are the words of those men. My best friend from college knew she was a lesbian as long ago as she can remember. She has had her share of relationships. Now she found someone to love and wants to be able to marry her girlfriend. New Jersey has it coming up for a vote very soon. I want nothing more than to put on a pretty dress and go to her wedding. I believe it will happen in my lifetime. The religious fanatics, thankfully, are not the majority of the world. I'm thankful to God every night because if I had to spent most of my days listening to the kind of bullshit nonsense that has come of our Carmeldelight in this thread, I would lose my freaking mind. By the way, I am a born again Christian. The definition of which is that I believe Jesus Christ was the son of God and died on the cross for my sins. I don't believe it to mean that every word of the bible needs to be followed as others have interpreted it. It means that God gave me free will and the intelligence to interpret it in the way that works for me by being kind to my fellow human beings and trying to be a good person. And AquaticSub - I hope that you and Val(I can't spell the rest without looking it up, sorry) have already started to do the paperwork for the adoption. Even overseas can take years. There is always also the option of adopting an older child, which can be done much quicker. I know there has been a lot of press in recent years about adoptions going tits up, but more adoptions are completed happily than are turned around. I wish you all the best on the adoption. Adoptive parents are extra special, because they want that baby that much more. Just the opinion of an adopted child.

AquaticSub -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 3:25:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady And AquaticSub - I hope that you and Val(I can't spell the rest without looking it up, sorry) have already started to do the paperwork for the adoption. Even overseas can take years. There is always also the option of adopting an older child, which can be done much quicker. I know there has been a lot of press in recent years about adoptions going tits up, but more adoptions are completed happily than are turned around. I wish you all the best on the adoption. Adoptive parents are extra special, because they want that baby that much more. Just the opinion of an adopted child. It's ok. Sometimes I spell his handle wrong. [;)] We haven't started the paperwork yet, partially because we aren't ready to bring a kid into the house yet and partially because we don't qualify yet. We haven't been married six months yet and most agencies require a mininum of years. And "but we'll probably have been married that long by the time you find us a kid" doesn't seem to cut it... Honestly, I'd like to adopt from America. Athough to a certain extent, I got freaked out by the agencies I contacted to get information. One was almost like a "custom order baby" service where they were asking all these questions about my and Valyraen's hair, eye and skin color so that they could give us a kid who looked like us. And then the DVD was full of couples who were all "we were so upset about not being able to give birth, we tried all the treatments and then we contact X company and got a kid who looks just like us!". Another seemed to aggressively recruit birth mothers and that disturbed me a bit. I mean, don't take me the wrong way... I completely understand that for couples who want to give birth not being able to is heart-breaking. But that isn't why I'm wanting to adopt at all. This isn't the second-best option for either of us. I actively want to give a child a loving home who truly needs one. I just wish there weren't so many rules, red tape and expenses involved in doing it when I can get knocked up right now for free. It really is very special for me to see you say that though. I know it's silly but honestly I start to tear up when I think about it getting to hold my baby for the first time, even if it's years away. Like I am right now... Sorry if this was a silly rant or jumbled. Obviously, it's very personal and touchy for me. goes off to find a tissue

eyesopened -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 4:15:43 AM)
LafayetteLady Thank you for your post! Currently people have to get a license first before they can marry. After the ceremony papers are filed with the juristiction, usually the county, and only then are marital 'rights' afforded. So we are almost on the path of civil union anyway. What concerns me a lot is in doing some internet research, I could not find but one state (New Jersey, I think) that gave equal rights under a civil union as with marriage. Personally, I don't care whether marriage is the term for a religious ceremony and civil union be the name of the secular contract, as long as they are equal in their implied rights. For the bigots, and folks like carmeldelight, their real objection is to homosexuality. Homosexuality is simply a part of nature, it exists in the natural world outside of human beings. So people are going to be gay. They are not going to be more gay if they have a civil union. They are not going to be less gay if they cannot be married. To me it is totally illogical to deny "marital" rights to homosexual couples even if one believes homosexuality to be "sinful". We surely don't limit marriage only to people who never break any of the 10 commandments. Adultery is rampant. Anyway, if "God" was so dead set against homosexuality he could have listed it up there with his commands instead of bury it within a few hundred laws (and I challage any "christian" to tell me they uphold all those laws.) OR create nature in such a fashion that homosexuality never occurs at all. Not to hijack my own thread, another thing to consider (those of us who believe in a Great Spirit in one form or another): In monotheism there is one God but creation of both male and female. Therefore God must be a spirit that encompases all that is male and all that is female. This allows for a wide variety of sexual orientations while still remaining in the "image of God".

stella41b -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 6:20:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Carmeldelight if you are going to adopt please get a child from America that is if your background is not messed up. i am tired of people going over seas to get a baby. there are plenty of children right here who needs a good home. Apartheid, homophobia, and xenophobia? I won't go into that wishing that people with certain characteristics be removed from humanity. So this is the way to serve the Lord? Hmmm, interesting.

GotSteel -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 6:57:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eyesopened For those who site the bible, how many follow all the laws laid out in Leviticus or do they honestly believe God was only joking about not eating lobster? Are you actually prepared to make male homosexuality a capitol crime punishable by death as indicated in Leviticus 20:13? Can anyone site a bible verse that says anything about Lesbian relationships? Good luck with this, trying to reason with people who's position is based on brainwashing is difficult to say the least. While the indoctrination can be deprogrammed by getting them to think through their position for themselves with questioning such as this, it's a long frustrating process. Keep in mind that the people taking this position likely have decades of conditioning telling them that gay people will bring the wrath of god own upon them. It's difficult to get someone to reason through that over the internet, especially when it's constantly being reinforced by their community and by weekly brainwashing sessions.

tazzygirl -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 7:20:30 AM)
Ya know, Steel. Leave brains out of this. many could say the same about the atheist movement at this time. Brainwashing takes more forms than just religious. And, frankly, quite a few posters who will argue for religion are here arguing for the rights of gays getting married.

Wolf2Bear -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 7:24:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Carmeldelight god did not make people gay.....it is the devils work of being gay!!! case closed Bullshit.

Wolf2Bear -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 7:30:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b quote: ORIGINAL: Carmeldelight if you are going to adopt please get a child from America that is if your background is not messed up. i am tired of people going over seas to get a baby. there are plenty of children right here who needs a good home. Apartheid, homophobia, and xenophobia? I won't go into that wishing that people with certain characteristics be removed from humanity. So this is the way to serve the Lord? Hmmm, interesting. Yanno Stella that's because god's probably still trying to come out of the closet! I have to wonder if god would make a good sub or dom?

pahunkboy -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 7:39:04 AM)
Jesus was gay. But really- does that matter?

pahunkboy -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 7:41:52 AM)
Be fruitful and multiply. 7 billion here now on earth which is over crowded. What does that say? been there -done that. I think now we can focus on making the earth a nicer place to live- God loves gay people the same as he loves others... and I am certain. because let he who is with out sin- cast the first stone.

Real0ne -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 8:08:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Its just more paperwork and recognition is completely irrelevant.... The only thing that counts is "standing" within the law, keeping in mind law trumps statutes. We have the infinite right to contract, and that right is possibly the most upheld right people have.......you can even "contract" to "waive" your right if you want. (which is what government regulated marriage does) First of all, what exactly do you think the "law" is? Obviously you don't know, so let me clarify it for you. STATUTES are the laws. When you break a law you are violating a statute. Statutes "can be" laws but they are not laws they are administrative codes used by the government. the basis for all law is consideration of the parties. As an example we can all pretty much agree that murdering your mom and dad would be a bad thing. Thou Shalt Not Murder. --- is Law Likewise with stealing --- thou shalt not covet. That is why they wrote up the UCC in an attempt to bring it closer to home.... Then you have the maxim of law (again based on the bible), that no man can control another against his will. Which gives us the distinction between law that which you imbed yourself and statute that which someone else tries to imbed you. In the United States, MARRIAGE is a legal CONTRACT. You do not have the "infinite" right to contract. You can't contract for things that are illegal, and you can not waive all of your legal rights in all circumstances. Not as a citizen you are correct but as a sovereign you most certainly can. The only way you cant and I agree to the extent that they have built in "some" safety nets, is if they rush to your aid...and come to your defense and that is subjective. Now as for marriage it is a sacred contract, and bringing into the state does absolutely nothing for you aside allowing them to get into your pants. The reason people use the state IMO is because they do not know of the old ways and they do not know how to manage their own affairs simply because it has never been taught..........and then they turn right around and cry rivers that government is oppressive.... its like getting married to a wife beater then crying about the bruises. When the CONTRACT you have "negotiated" has a problem, and someone wants out of the contract, that is what the LAW does...define whether the parameters of the contract were reasonable and just. So at the end of the contract, if one of the parties is not holding up their end of the agreement, the parties go to Court to assist in the contract being upheld. Well law just defines the contract and the contract IS the law. No law does not define what is fair and just, it just identifies the boundaries and elements of the contract. Well they hold court actually.... I dont mean to nitpick but the problem with law is that things do not mean what we think they mean.... They have their own little club and their own little language to go with that little club. The problem of course with court is not the battle is to be decided by people who have no clue of the intent of the contract except that which is in writing. the problem of course with writing is the verb adverb modifiers that can and does give these people who have to decide several options of definition to choose from which if you are not aware can wind up interpreting your case contrary to any intended meaning. In other words, you basically have no clue about the legality of a contract and your belief that there is a difference between "law" and "statutes" just solidifies that fact. Of course I do and Law trumps legal... just another one of theose pesky distinctions they forget to teach people... Not all laws are based in religion. Yes, many "laws" have developed out of religious doctrine, however, as society has evolved, so has the law. When the bible was written, guns did not exist. Gun laws were developed because guns were developed. Well the kings would supply their vassals with weapons... You see you use the term guns and the term used in the constitution is arms....its because arms does not restrict it to any given specific implement and opens it up for the implements of the time.... So what theat means much to the disatisfaction of many is that if nukes are the weapon of the time then nukes are what the arms are. Kings used to arm the people to protect the kingdom against attack in the event of an all out overtake situation. The "common law" is based on what is for the "common good." Yes, the bible says that murder is wrong, but I don't think there are many people that are going to say that having laws against murder goes against the interests of society. Here is the definition of common law [image]local://upfiles/59055/A139E48EB8204F80A2A5B8FEFA6774DA.jpg[/image] Carmeldelight, You obviously want to represent yourself as a Christian. Just for grins a quick comment on this..... CD would be presenting themselves as Christian, not re-presenting themself. These distinctions may seem trivial but they will determine who wins or loses the battle in court.

eyesopened -> RE: Why are people afraid of same-sex marriage? (1/10/2010 8:13:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: eyesopened For those who site the bible, how many follow all the laws laid out in Leviticus or do they honestly believe God was only joking about not eating lobster? Are you actually prepared to make male homosexuality a capitol crime punishable by death as indicated in Leviticus 20:13? Can anyone site a bible verse that says anything about Lesbian relationships? Good luck with this, trying to reason with people who's position is based on brainwashing is difficult to say the least. While the indoctrination can be deprogrammed by getting them to think through their position for themselves with questioning such as this, it's a long frustrating process. Keep in mind that the people taking this position likely have decades of conditioning telling them that gay people will bring the wrath of god own upon them. It's difficult to get someone to reason through that over the internet, especially when it's constantly being reinforced by their community and by weekly brainwashing sessions. GotSteel: I have been called a lot of names because of my personal belief in God as I know It. I too was "brainwashed" from my earliest years. One thing that I am forever grateful for is that the ELCA Lutheran denomination I was "brainwashed" by took great pains to teach me the importance of questioning the Church, questioning dogma, questioning everything and seeking personal enlightenment. I can recall my earliest memories of Sunday School and the bible verse carved upon the face of the alter. "Ask and ye shall receive, seek and ye shall find, knock and it shall be opened." In other words, I was "brainwashed" into independent thought. A thing can be abnormal but at the same time perfectly natural. I remember a girl in my music class in junior high actually calling me "the devil" because I have green eyes. To her, that eye color (and when I was younger it was more vivid than now) was so abnormal it could only be a sign of some demonic presence. She was so frightened of me that it was almost laughable. To her defense, her family were immigrants from the Middle East and she had simply never seen green eyes in her life. It would make about as much sense to say green-eyed-devils should not be allowed to marry as it is to say people cannot marry because of their sexual orientation.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875