Page 41 of 41

Re: homosexuality

Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 11:48 pm
by Multiverse
Looking through this page of the thread, I feel like their can be strong arguments against anti-gay marriage.
...against anti-gay marriage? So you're saying there's strong reasons why hetero people shouldn't be allowed to marry? =P

Re: homosexuality

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:34 am
by bluealice
No, I think cezen simply implies that this thread makes the anti-gay-marriage argument vulnerable from those who are against it. Which means, pro-gay marriage is getting stronger. What does it have to do with heteros? We're in the center of an argument only between the homos, because homosexuality is controversial. Why add heteros? Ugh.

Re: homosexuality

Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 3:51 am
by cezen
No, I think cezen simply implies that this thread makes the anti-gay-marriage argument vulnerable from those who are against it. Which means, pro-gay marriage is getting stronger. What does it have to do with heteros? We're in the center of an argument only between the homos, because homosexuality is controversial. Why add heteros? Ugh.
It was a joke, he's playing on the meaning of "anti" as opposite(opposite of gay marriage is heterosexual marriage) as opposed to its other meaning "against" that I used... It's a good joke.

And no, that doesn't mean pro-gay marriage is getting stronger. ('-' )

Re: homosexuality

Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 12:24 am
by cezen
...Personally, and I speak for a lot of people here...
I'm not sure whether it was on purpose, but either way that's a brilliant phrase that I will, given the opportunity, use. :laughing:
Also, just adding an argument of my own, just let gay people get married, someone else's marriage doesn't affect you.
Exactly. For that very specific reason, I find it quite silly to be anti-gay marriage.
Homophobia is one thing - it's unfortunate, but if you're genuinely uncomfortable about it, that's an honest matter. However, logic should be enough to convince anyone to leave people alone if you don't get along with them.
I think, by the way, that this argument, as phrased by Heiks, is where the discussion tends to come to a standstill. I've seen no arguments yet to counter it.
Here's my counter:

The issue that a large chunk of people - religious people - have with gay marriage is more than simply being "uncomfortable" with it or simply homophobia. There's certainly more to it than simply not getting along with homosexuals.

Certain religions, like Christianity, believe that the religious principle is that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Christians have a problem with it because they percieve gay marriage as polluting the their religious doctrines - the word of God. It doesn't matter if it doesn't directly affect you; it spits in the face of your religion. Whether or not homosexuals hold their religion is irrelevant to a Christian whom believes that God’s laws apply to society in general, even sinners and nonbelievers.

Not to mention, the idea that you shouldn't care about something because it doesn't affect you does not hold up as a general principle. When Martin Luther King protested against slavery, he had the help of a few white religious leaders and others. Should whites have simply left the equality movement alone because Segregation doesn't affect them(like it negatively affected minorities)? Should Americans not care a bit about helping the starving kids in Africa, since it doesn’t directly affect them? It all comes down to principles of morality. And you may say “but in those examples, they are helping people”. And with those who protest gay marriage on religious grounds, they think they are helping society by preventing people from disobeying God’s laws.

Re: homosexuality

Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:38 pm
by Parrot
So... What should atheists do?
People who get divorced are technically disobeying God. That's why there's a Church of England, because Henry VIII got divorced. Techincally it's because he thought he shouldn't have married his dead brother's wife, but still... And millions of couples are getting divorced.
If we're breaking this religious law, what's wrong with gay marriage?
:huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh:

Re: homosexuality

Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:40 pm
by cezen
So... What should atheists do?
People who get divorced are technically disobeying God. That's why there's a Church of England, because Henry VIII got divorced. Techincally it's because he thought he shouldn't have married his dead brother's wife, but still... And millions of couples are getting divorced.
If we're breaking this religious law, what's wrong with gay marriage?
:huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh:
1. What do you mean by your question "What should atheists do" ?
2. Does divorce technically break God's law? I think you're gonna have to go ahead and support this statement instead of throwing it out there.
Here's a list of bible verses about it:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/div_bibl.htm/
Some of the wording of them implies the allowance of divorce.
3. Even supposing that divorce break's God's law, do the majority of the christian sects interpret the scripture that way? Do they believe it as so?
4. Even supposing divorce break's God law, does that mean christians should ignore gay marriage because they are choosing to focus on it instead of another social practice that break's God's law, but doesn't offend their religious zeal to the same extant?
5. What if the anti-gay marriage christians simply think the issue of gay marriage is more important, more fundamental law of God that's being broken than divorce - and thus assign it more importance?

Re: homosexuality

Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2015 7:03 pm
by Athena32
The bible tells us that homosexuality is a sin.
(That is just an interpretation)

The bible directly says that "God loves all his children". Which part do we listen to?

I'm for gay marriage, because marriage is a right. I know a couple who have had an ongoing relationship for 50 years, yet aren't allowed to marry. Is that right? You're stripping people of their basic rights to form a union under the law, and that, in my opinion, is a violation of a person's basic rights. You can't say whether or not a person acts gay, and you will never know unless they decide it themselves. It is a personal decision based on your feelings.

Re: homosexuality

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2015 3:45 am
by Merv Simestra
Technically speaking, the purpose of this debate no longer exists, since it was asking whether gay marriage should be legal in America or not. It's legal now, so the only purpose left is to argue whether it's right or not.

Personally, I feel it's fine this way as long as religious people have the right to disagree and turn people away from their private businesses because they don't want their work at an event they don't support. Similar to the Christian bakery that had been sought out to make a cake for a gay couple. Now, if the couple had asked for a bunch of cupcakes, and not told the owners they would be served at their wedding, I'm certain the owners would have been fine. However, the couple specifically asked that the owners cater their gay wedding. Thus the owners declined, pointed the couple to different bakeries, and there it really should have ended. But the couple got mad, claimed discrimination, and thus the large mess that has occurred.

I don't want to get into an argument about the details of the above event (I've seen both sides on Facebook, and they both are calling the other names at this point, so let's not start that here). However, I do want to make clear the concern that religious and personal freedoms maybe restricted because of whether or not we, religious individuals, agree with the new law. That is all.

P.S. You can love the sinner and hate the sin, and vice versa. Though I prefer the former immensely over the latter.