Neurox Media Network: idolforums.com | aikenforums.com | IDF Webmail  
Neurox Media's American Idol 10, 9 & 8 / So You Think You Can Dance 8, 7 & 6 / Glee / X Factor Forums & Message Boards
Neurox Advertising   The banner image below is an ad.

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register - It's quick & free! | Resend Validation )    

14 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 > »    ( Goto last unread Go to first unread post )
( Star this topic Star this topic | View starred topics )    Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Equality, but only if you have liberal views?, Venting. It's getting on my nerves.
krazykelli
post Jul 4th 2011, 11:33 PM
Post #21



**********

Group: Members

Posts: 10,155
Gender: Female
From: Alabama
Fav. Person: Dianna Agron



I just don't understand how two people getting married is going to harm you in any way whatsoever. And being gay, it is sort of offensive when I see that people don't want me to have basic rights. I haven't done anything wrong and I deserve the same rights as straight people. Should we still be living in the days where African Americans are slaves and don't have the same rights as Caucasians? Because that was what this country was like for years too. Like Steven said, put yourself in the other person's shoes. If you were gay, you would want the same exact rights. It's fine that you have that opinion, but your opinion shouldn't decide on MY happiness. I don't care what you do with your life, it's not going to hurt me in any way. So why are you so concerned if two people that love each other get married?

This post has been edited by krazykelli: Jul 4th 2011, 11:35 PM


--------------------
IPB Image IPB Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
NX AdBot™
post Jul 4th 2011, 11:33 PM


NX Advertisement


Group: Marketing

Posts: I've been known to spam...
Gender: Not telling :P


Subscribe to NX to remove this advertisement post. Help us pay for our servers! Click for subscriber benefits.

 
 
Go to the top of the page
packerfansam
post Jul 5th 2011, 12:35 AM
Post #22



******

Group: Members

Posts: 708
Gender: Female
From: Wisconsin
Fav. AI6: Jordin Sparks
Fav. AI7: David Cook



QUOTE(Steven @ Jul 4th 2011, 2:46 PM) *

2. I'm pro-life. I just can never over look abortion about just saying "Gee, abortion is okay!" Cause it's really not okay to murder, but that's another story compared to the main topic in this thread.

3. I'm 100% for gay marriage, and I think it's 100% wrong if someone isn't. Sorry. When people protest against letting people have the simple freedoms that heterosexual couples have is ridiculous. I take offense when people want to keep my friends who are gay from having equality and to be treated like human beings. Nobody is forcing anything on you, but do you really expect people to just sit there and shut up when people treat them like dogs? This is more than a religious and traditional thing, these are live humans we're talking about and not pets. It's even wrong to use pets as an analogy, because anything living shouldn't have to go through the hate that gay people go through. So I completely disagree with you and I think it's 100% wrong to deny any human rights like this.


Ah, someone else who shares my views, ones that some may call contradictory, but I don't.

Anyway, if you're looking at gay marriage from a religious perspective (particularly Christian), it seems very un-Christian to me to spread hatred about someone. I personally believe it should be the choice of each congregation/church/pastor as to whether or not they're willing to perform a marriage ceremony for a gay couple, but the option should not be legally taken away. That is one thing as an Independent that annoys me about Republicans. They're the party that is always screaming about government needing to not interfere with people's lives, yet they think the government should decide who people can and can't marry.

Now, just to avoid stereotypes, let's make sure we all remember that not all very religious people are Republicans. Several Democrats are very openly driven by their faith, Jimmy Carter and Joe Biden for instance.



In loving memory of my buddy, Toby
1998-2011



--------------------
Help save innocent lives - go to www.petfinder.com.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Steven
post Jul 5th 2011, 12:56 AM
Post #23


Plant your hope with good seeds
Group Icon

Group: Neurox Media Moderators

Posts: 99,692
Gender: Male
From: District 12
Fav. AI6: Jordin Sparks
Fav. AI13: Jena Irene
Fav. Team: The Yankees



QUOTE(packerfansam @ Jul 5th 2011, 12:35 AM) *

Ah, someone else who shares my views, ones that some may call contradictory, but I don't.

Anyway, if you're looking at gay marriage from a religious perspective (particularly Christian), it seems very un-Christian to me to spread hatred about someone. I personally believe it should be the choice of each congregation/church/pastor as to whether or not they're willing to perform a marriage ceremony for a gay couple, but the option should not be legally taken away. That is one thing as an Independent that annoys me about Republicans. They're the party that is always screaming about government needing to not interfere with people's lives, yet they think the government should decide who people can and can't marry.

Now, just to avoid stereotypes, let's make sure we all remember that not all very religious people are Republicans. Several Democrats are very openly driven by their faith, Jimmy Carter and Joe Biden for instance.
In loving memory of my buddy, Toby
1998-2011


It's not the entire party that's like that, but there are a few nut jobs "Bachmann, Romney, Paul etc" that make Republicans look evil. Now, I know McCain wasn't everyone's favorite piece of pie, but the man was smart. Plus, he wasn't for a constitutional ban of gay marriage, he was up for the states making their decisions. Is it the best answer? No, but at least he didn't want to ban marriage cause he didn't believe in it. The Republican party needs some major reform IMO, otherwise it's going to die in the next 20 years. I'm not saying don't be conservative, but just lighten up on civil rights, and the belief that the entire country shares deep southern 1950s views, because the south is NOT America.

I understand it being left up to the churches to decide if they want gays getting married in their church, but not letting the church make the laws. I think it would be in the best interest of gays to get married in gay friendly churches/areas. A gay couple would be stupid to want to get married in a church that doesn't believe in gay marriage by a bunch of people who are wishing death, hate, sins, horrible things on them under their breath. Not every church is like this, but there are religious nut jobs who if they could they would probably kill all gays in the world. So I'm okay with it being left up to the church to say who they want to perform a wedding for.

Yeah, some Democrats are just as anti-gay as some Republicans. Take a look at New York's vote on gay marriage. There were 29 no votes, and not every single vote was from a Republican. Out of the entire democratic side one democrat said no, and he is an extremely religious man. Now, I don't think he did his job correctly. It seemed to me like he was putting religion before the constitution which pretty much states "Separation of Church and state." Yeah, I love the bible and everything, but if I was ever in office the bible would be in my desk draw for me, not under my arm as I vote no to giving people equal rights. Again, I love being a christian, but if I wasn't christian I would think some people in the religion are horrible people.

Which ties to my entire point. There are good and bad in both parties, and you really can't discriminate against one for a few crazies. We have ultra liberals who want to see pretty much no order in the country "no laws, no military, no nothing", and we have conservative who want to see this country as a christian middle east. What you need in America is a decent man or woman who sees past religious biases, will go against their party if they have to, and someone who just wants to make people happy. I don't want someone who is too liberal, nor too conservative, but someone who's head isn't so far up their ass they don't think rationally.


--------------------
Teams: Yankees, Devils, Giants || Music: A7X, Mumford & Sons, Springsteen, Bruno Mars, Drake || Budlime IPB Image
IPB ImageIPB ImageIPB ImageIPB ImageIPB Image
IPB Image Icons: Yankees, Hunger Games, French Fries, Jennifer Lawrence, Pokemon || AI12: Angie, Kree, Amber, JanelleIPB Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
RWG
post Jul 5th 2011, 1:03 AM
Post #24



**********

Group: Members

Posts: 20,037
From: Canada



QUOTE(packerfansam @ Jul 4th 2011, 10:35 PM) *

Ah, someone else who shares my views, ones that some may call contradictory, but I don't.

Anyway, if you're looking at gay marriage from a religious perspective (particularly Christian), it seems very un-Christian to me to spread hatred about someone. I personally believe it should be the choice of each congregation/church/pastor as to whether or not they're willing to perform a marriage ceremony for a gay couple, but the option should not be legally taken away. That is one thing as an Independent that annoys me about Republicans. They're the party that is always screaming about government needing to not interfere with people's lives, yet they think the government should decide who people can and can't marry.

That's the beauty of Republican policy. Government is bad, but it's all of a sudden good when it protects Christian/tradtionally conservative standpoints (gay marriage and abortion being the staples).


--------------------
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
packerfansam
post Jul 5th 2011, 2:59 AM
Post #25



******

Group: Members

Posts: 708
Gender: Female
From: Wisconsin
Fav. AI6: Jordin Sparks
Fav. AI7: David Cook



QUOTE(Steven @ Jul 5th 2011, 12:56 AM) *
Now, I don't think he did his job correctly. It seemed to me like he was putting religion before the constitution which pretty much states "Separation of Church and state." Yeah, I love the bible and everything, but if I was ever in office the bible would be in my desk draw for me, not under my arm as I vote no to giving people equal rights. Again, I love being a christian, but if I wasn't christian I would think some people in the religion are horrible people.


Separating religion from politics is probably a good idea for the most part, for more than one reason. One is that it's obviously something so personal. A faith-guided government would be dangerous for those in disagreement with the ideas of those in power, while a government-guided faith is wrong and dangerous in many ways. Another is that countries that have an 'official religion' like England and others in Scandinavia are areas where faith is very sadly becoming less prominent. Almost like people are rebelling against the establishment or something, and the whole idea of a united faithful nation backfires. However, to think that religious beliefs have no bearing on this or any other government is naive. An elected official (at least a good one) is largely influenced by their morals and what they truly feel is right. A lot of people's morals, elected officials included, are influenced by their faith. And reasonably, you can't ask someone to vote against their conscience. I don't think I could. I'm not saying I agree with this person from New York, but I'm saying right or wrong, it seems like he voted his conscience. The whole point of a governing body elected by the people for the people is for that body to decide in their best opinion what is best for said people. If the people freely elected someone whose opinion and morals are driven by faith and leads them to do what they truly feel is right, so be it.

QUOTE(RWG @ Jul 5th 2011, 1:03 AM) *

That's the beauty of Republican policy. Government is bad, but it's all of a sudden good when it protects Christian/tradtionally conservative standpoints (gay marriage and abortion being the staples).


Well, here's where some may disagree with me. To me, gay marriage and abortion are not quite the same moral dilemmas, hence my differing viewpoints on them. Abortion is something that people won't likely have a consensus agreement on in our lifetimes, if ever. What it usually boils down to for the pro-life side is destroying life. It depends on when people feel life begins. Is it at conception? A few weeks after? A few months? Some believe not even until the child is born. In a country where protecting its children is one of (if not the) top priorities, for a large portion of the population, some polls and studies indicate a majority, abortion is murdering a child and thought of that is beyond appalling. Some feel the right to choose who they marry is a basic right, I agree. And some feel that a woman's right to choose is a basic right, that may be, but for many it's not just the woman involved, it's taking away the life of a child. I feel abortion should still be legal in cases where the mother's life is in direct danger, but I cannot in good conscience support it when there is no imminent harm threatening the mother.



In loving memory of my buddy, Toby
1998-2011



--------------------
Help save innocent lives - go to www.petfinder.com.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bumnummies
post Jul 5th 2011, 7:20 AM
Post #26



**********

Group: Blend Artists

Posts: 41,246
Gender: Female
From: Ontari-ari-ari-oooo.



QUOTE(Abybaby @ Jul 4th 2011, 8:41 PM) *

OT: Marriage is indeed a religious sacrament, but the legalization of gay marriage is not really about getting married in a certain church but more of a civil union (being recognized by the law as one family)... at least that's how I see I'm not american.


Which is why I've always said, if the church is really taking issue on the term "marriage" because of it's direct linkage as a religious sacrament, then NO marriages should be recognized by the state. Marriage becomes a religious ceremony and civil unions become what is recognized legally FOR ALL.


QUOTE(*Christy* @ Jul 4th 2011, 10:29 PM) *

Basically our views are just peachy so long as we never ever do anything to stand up for what we believe in. It really sucks.


Once again, when your views infringe upon the rights of others...... which really comes down usually to arguments on Gay marriage and abortion... wink.gif And really I respect being Pro-Life mostly, because personally I'm against abortion... I just think you're wrong for having the interest of the unborn fetus (pre-viability) supersede the rights of a living, breathing, walking, adult. wink.gif And additionally, I think it's hideous to protest outside of abortion clinics where desperate women go, thinking it's their only choice, and basically scream at them that they're murderers, instead of supporting funding that better educates the mother so that she makes a different decision (or that she doesn't get pregnant in the first place) and that supports her mentally and physically during her pregnancy (remember: You have to pay for your mental/physical health care in the US!), as well as more support for the mother/baby/adoption process after the child is born... because that's a big thing Pro-Lifers forget - there's still going to be an unwanted baby at the end of the day. wink.gif And it's also incredibly hideous to parade your children on the streets carrying "Baby Killer" signs. whistling.gif Because really, all of that is what pisses me off about Pro-Lifers, not the fact that at the core, you oppose abortion... because really, most Pro-Choicers oppose it personally also. wink.gif

QUOTE(RWG @ Jul 5th 2011, 2:03 AM) *

That's the beauty of Republican policy. Government is bad, but it's all of a sudden good when it protects Christian/tradtionally conservative standpoints (gay marriage and abortion being the staples).


Pretty much!

This post has been edited by bumnummies: Jul 5th 2011, 7:41 AM


--------------------
MY NAME IS JENN. | COME VISIT ME ON TUMBLR OK? | or TWITTER | VERSION: COLCHELE.
IPB Image
| GLEE: Rachel. Kurt. Blaine. Tina. Santana. Sam. Brittany. And Everyone Else. :) | OH and I make stuff: REDBUBBLE |
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pnkrngrwnnb
post Jul 5th 2011, 9:19 AM
Post #27



**********

Group: Members

Posts: 12,122
Gender: Female
From: Grand Manan, NB, Canada
Fav. Fandom: Channel Awesome



QUOTE(bumnummies @ Jul 5th 2011, 9:20 AM) *

Once again, when your views infringe upon the rights of others...... which really comes down usually to arguments on Gay marriage and abortion... wink.gif And really I respect being Pro-Life mostly, because personally I'm against abortion... I just think you're wrong for having the interest of the unborn fetus (pre-viability) supersede the rights of a living, breathing, walking, adult. wink.gif And additionally, I think it's hideous to protest outside of abortion clinics where desperate women go, thinking it's their only choice, and basically scream at them that they're murderers, instead of supporting funding that better educates the mother so that she makes a different decision (or that she doesn't get pregnant in the first place) and that supports her mentally and physically during her pregnancy (remember: You have to pay for your mental/physical health care in the US!), as well as more support for the mother/baby/adoption process after the child is born... because that's a big thing Pro-Lifers forget - there's still going to be an unwanted baby at the end of the day. wink.gif And it's also incredibly hideous to parade your children on the streets carrying "Baby Killer" signs. whistling.gif Because really, all of that is what pisses me off about Pro-Lifers, not the fact that at the core, you oppose abortion... because really, most Pro-Choicers oppose it personally also. wink.gif



Well, as far as I'm concerned, "infringing on the rights of others" is only wrong if the so-called right is something the Bible says is okay. Also, the way I see it, marriage isn't really a right. It's a privilege reserved only for those who qualify.

You're right, waving signs and screaming and not doing anything to help women avoid abortion and help children who need homes is wrong. Which is why I've never protested outside a clinic in that manner (I find praying quietly outside a clinic or hospital more dignified and effective). And I strongly believe in the need for generous funding to provide pregnant teenagers, single mothers, families in need and "unwanted" children with financial aid, education, housing, and everything else. We pro-lifers are not quite as thoughtless as you seem to think. I suppose there might be some losers out there. But I've never met anyone like that. Please don't paint us all with the same brush.

This post has been edited by *Christy*: Jul 5th 2011, 9:20 AM


--------------------
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
1201O
post Jul 5th 2011, 10:16 AM
Post #28



**********

Group: Members

Posts: 8,570
From: Sur Africa
Fav. AI8: Allison Iraheta
Fav. AI1: Kelly Clarkson
Fav. FAV. Celebrity: Jessica Alba



QUOTE(*Christy* @ Jul 5th 2011, 10:19 AM) *

Well, as far as I'm concerned, "infringing on the rights of others" is only wrong if the so-called right is something the Bible says is okay. Also, the way I see it, marriage isn't really a right. It's a privilege reserved only for those who qualify.

You're right, waving signs and screaming and not doing anything to help women avoid abortion and help children who need homes is wrong. Which is why I've never protested outside a clinic in that manner (I find praying quietly outside a clinic or hospital more dignified and effective). And I strongly believe in the need for generous funding to provide pregnant teenagers, single mothers, families in need and "unwanted" children with financial aid, education, housing, and everything else. We pro-lifers are not quite as thoughtless as you seem to think. I suppose there might be some losers out there. But I've never met anyone like that. Please don't paint us all with the same brush.

One of the principles this country was founded on was the freedom of religion and the separation of church and state. Religion has no business in politics or in government, and it's horrifying to see that so many politicians still use their Religion as part of their political platform.

Second, if we're are going to say that the "infringing on the rights of others is only wrong if the so-called right is something the Bible says is okay," then slavery should be legal, as should the stoning of women. You can't just pick and choose what parts of the bible you want to follow.

This post has been edited by 1201O: Jul 5th 2011, 10:17 AM


--------------------
IPB Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
chrisnelson
post Jul 5th 2011, 10:37 AM
Post #29



**********

Group: Members

Posts: 5,588
Gender: Male
From: Ohio
Fav. AI7: David Cook
Fav. AI8: Kris Allen
Fav. AI9: Ben



QUOTE(sneaky @ Jul 3rd 2011, 9:53 PM) *

I will also say I think Democats need to show Sarah Palin more respect. They lobby for women's rights and respect and yet the way they treat her is a bit..hypocritical


So you want us to give her a break because she's a woman? Wouldn't that be sexist? Look, we can't help it that she acts like the biggest bimbo on this side of the pacific. You want people to give her a break? Then tell her to educate herself or shut the hell up.


--------------------
IPB Image
credit: Allison/AVI:Ashleigh AI9: Crystal/Alex/Katelyn - Some things never change, for instance, the Adam Lambert forum remains the scariest place on earth.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
packerfansam
post Jul 5th 2011, 2:41 PM
Post #30



******

Group: Members

Posts: 708
Gender: Female
From: Wisconsin
Fav. AI6: Jordin Sparks
Fav. AI7: David Cook



QUOTE(1201O @ Jul 5th 2011, 10:16 AM) *

One of the principles this country was founded on was the freedom of religion and the separation of church and state. Religion has no business in politics or in government, and it's horrifying to see that so many politicians still use their Religion as part of their political platform.


Here's the thing though, as American citizens, politicians have the right to be very religious. If a candidate's principles are heavily influenced by their faith, and they're open about it, and the people elect them anyway, then how is that horrifying? Telling someone, anyone, that they can't openly practice and profess their faith is infringing upon their religious right in the country, whether they're public officials or not.

QUOTE(*Christy* @ Jul 5th 2011, 9:19 AM) *

You're right, waving signs and screaming and not doing anything to help women avoid abortion and help children who need homes is wrong. Which is why I've never protested outside a clinic in that manner (I find praying quietly outside a clinic or hospital more dignified and effective). And I strongly believe in the need for generous funding to provide pregnant teenagers, single mothers, families in need and "unwanted" children with financial aid, education, housing, and everything else. We pro-lifers are not quite as thoughtless as you seem to think. I suppose there might be some losers out there. But I've never met anyone like that. Please don't paint us all with the same brush.


I agree with this. Hateful protests are more likely to do harm than good as far as trying to help people see our side of the issue, and I don't like that so many people think of us that way. But it is a big problem that so many ultra-conservative politicians want to outlaw abortion, which I agree with, but then don't want to offer anything to help teenagers, single mothers, families in need and people in other situations that are more likely to consider an abortion. The fact is, more people would probably not have an abortion if they had better means to take care of a child.



In loving memory of my buddy, Toby
1998-2011




--------------------
Help save innocent lives - go to www.petfinder.com.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pnkrngrwnnb
post Jul 5th 2011, 2:57 PM
Post #31



**********

Group: Members

Posts: 12,122
Gender: Female
From: Grand Manan, NB, Canada
Fav. Fandom: Channel Awesome



QUOTE(1201O @ Jul 5th 2011, 12:16 PM) *

One of the principles this country was founded on was the freedom of religion and the separation of church and state. Religion has no business in politics or in government, and it's horrifying to see that so many politicians still use their Religion as part of their political platform.

Second, if we're are going to say that the "infringing on the rights of others is only wrong if the so-called right is something the Bible says is okay," then slavery should be legal, as should the stoning of women. You can't just pick and choose what parts of the bible you want to follow.


The whole concept of separation of church and state was designed to protect the Church from the State. This current idea that no politician should be allowed to follow their conscience is absurd.

You have no idea what you're talking about. The Bible doesn't condone slavery. There is a portion where slaves are advised to obey their masters, but the author was speaking to the slaves of the day. (Ancient times, particularly in Rome) If they had revolted, they would have been put to death. You need to understand CONTEXT. As for women being stoned as punishment, that law no longer applies, due to the New Covenant.
There are three types of biblical precepts: moral, ceremonial, and judicial. The ceremonial and judicial no longer apply, it's only the moral commands that are binding.


--------------------
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pnkrngrwnnb
post Jul 5th 2011, 3:18 PM
Post #32



**********

Group: Members

Posts: 12,122
Gender: Female
From: Grand Manan, NB, Canada
Fav. Fandom: Channel Awesome



QUOTE(packerfansam @ Jul 5th 2011, 4:41 PM) *


I agree with this. Hateful protests are more likely to do harm than good as far as trying to help people see our side of the issue, and I don't like that so many people think of us that way. But it is a big problem that so many ultra-conservative politicians want to outlaw abortion, which I agree with, but then don't want to offer anything to help teenagers, single mothers, families in need and people in other situations that are more likely to consider an abortion. The fact is, more people would probably not have an abortion if they had better means to take care of a child.
In loving memory of my buddy, Toby
1998-2011



I was thinking about this a bit more. I think one part of the problem could be, in general, that we want to discourage abortion but we're afraid encourage to birth control because we're afraid of it being seen as promoting sex among the unmarried set. I guess we might need to learn to pick our battles. Also, pregnancy out of wedlock carries such a stigma that it discourages us from helping because we don't want to be seen as condoning it. It's a problem. There are Christian ministries that reach out to young mothers and the like, but they're unfunded, under appreciated and not as well known as they ought to be. To be honest, though I know they exist, I couldn't give you a name. Clearly, we're not doing enough. And obviously we need to be fighting for family allowances. The family is the most Important unit in society, we have to support it properly.


--------------------
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ionlywantu2stay
post Jul 5th 2011, 4:15 PM
Post #33



**********

Group: Members

Posts: 14,698
Gender: Female
From: Pigfarts
Fav. AI9: They all suck



QUOTE(Steven @ Jul 4th 2011, 3:46 PM) *

1. I'm a Republican too. Hello.

2. I'm pro-life. I just can never over look abortion about just saying "Gee, abortion is okay!" Cause it's really not okay to murder, but that's another story compared to the main topic in this thread.

3. I'm 100% for gay marriage, and I think it's 100% wrong if someone isn't. Sorry. When people protest against letting people have the simple freedoms that heterosexual couples have is ridiculous. I take offense when people want to keep my friends who are gay from having equality and to be treated like human beings. Nobody is forcing anything on you, but do you really expect people to just sit there and shut up when people treat them like dogs? This is more than a religious and traditional thing, these are live humans we're talking about and not pets. It's even wrong to use pets as an analogy, because anything living shouldn't have to go through the hate that gay people go through. So I completely disagree with you and I think it's 100% wrong to deny any human rights like this.

Now I completely respect your view, but I totally think you should look from the other side of the fence. If you were gay would you want to get married? If you were gay would you want people to try and strip your constitutional rights? If you were gay would you want people to hate you?


QUOTE(krazykelli @ Jul 5th 2011, 12:33 AM) *

I just don't understand how two people getting married is going to harm you in any way whatsoever. And being gay, it is sort of offensive when I see that people don't want me to have basic rights. I haven't done anything wrong and I deserve the same rights as straight people. Should we still be living in the days where African Americans are slaves and don't have the same rights as Caucasians? Because that was what this country was like for years too. Like Steven said, put yourself in the other person's shoes. If you were gay, you would want the same exact rights. It's fine that you have that opinion, but your opinion shouldn't decide on MY happiness.I don't care what you do with your life, it's not going to hurt me in any way. So why are you so concerned if two people that love each other get married?



Agree 100%. Plus I think that the people, not the government, should be allowed the freedom to live their lives, as long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights of others. The government should NEVER be big enough to stop two, consenting, unmarried adults who love each other from getting married. No exceptions.

And now a quote from the late, great Republican icon, Barry Goldwater:

"It’s time America realized that there is no gay exemption in the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the Declaration of Independence."

To the OP: The beauty of our country is the freedom to express your opinions without consequence, as long as such expression does not infringe upon another's rights. But nowhere in the Constitution does it say that those others have to agree with or even accept said opinion. If you have the freedom to agree with something, then others definitely have the freedom to be unhappy with it, perhaps even disgusted with your opinion. It's one of the downsides of the First Amendment. But that's America for you original.gif

This post has been edited by ionlywantu2stay: Jul 5th 2011, 4:20 PM


--------------------
Daddy daddy you came to love me!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
1201O
post Jul 5th 2011, 6:19 PM
Post #34



**********

Group: Members

Posts: 8,570
From: Sur Africa
Fav. AI8: Allison Iraheta
Fav. AI1: Kelly Clarkson
Fav. FAV. Celebrity: Jessica Alba



QUOTE(*Christy* @ Jul 5th 2011, 3:57 PM) *

The whole concept of separation of church and state was designed to protect the Church from the State. This current idea that no politician should be allowed to follow their conscience is absurd.

You have no idea what you're talking about. The Bible doesn't condone slavery. There is a portion where slaves are advised to obey their masters, but the author was speaking to the slaves of the day. (Ancient times, particularly in Rome) If they had revolted, they would have been put to death. You need to understand CONTEXT. As for women being stoned as punishment, that law no longer applies, due to the New Covenant.
There are three types of biblical precepts: moral, ceremonial, and judicial. The ceremonial and judicial no longer apply, it's only the moral commands that are binding.

No, you have no idea of what you talking about. The Bible clearly condones slavery in several different books:

QUOTE
However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)


QUOTE
If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)


QUOTE
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)


QUOTE
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)


QUOTE
[size=7]Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)[size=7]


QUOTE
[size=4] Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)[/size


QUOTE
The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)


I can keep going and going, would you like more examples? There wasn't just one author talking about slavery in Roman times, theres examples of slavery being condoned all over the bible, even in the New Testament. You can't just use the excuse about "context" in every single one. The Bible even hypocritically condones Murder and Rape in some cases. Yes, I said murder and rape, and I can find plenty of examples to prove that. I find that most Christians have never really read the Bible thoroughly, and they defend a book that they really know little about.

The eternal moral code you are referring to, that all Christians should always follow, regardless of the time period, is supposed to be summed up by the ten commandments. So if this moral code is the only thing thats binding in the bible, than I don't see why you think same sex marriage is immoral. The ten commandments don't condem homosexuality.

The bible is filled with horrific things. It condones a lot of atrocities. But Christianity has INVENTED a lot of excuses over time in order to explain them.

--------------------------------------------

I'm not saying a politician shouldn't be allowed to follow their conscience. I'm saying that passing laws just because it's written somewhere in the bible, is terrifying. Running on a political platform centered entirely around the bible is horrifying. Religion should be separate from politics. It's possible to have a conscience, and morals without having to tout the bible as evidence.

This post has been edited by 1201O: Jul 5th 2011, 6:51 PM


--------------------
IPB Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bumnummies
post Jul 5th 2011, 6:49 PM
Post #35



**********

Group: Blend Artists

Posts: 41,246
Gender: Female
From: Ontari-ari-ari-oooo.



QUOTE(*Christy* @ Jul 5th 2011, 10:19 AM) *

Well, as far as I'm concerned, "infringing on the rights of others" is only wrong if the so-called right is something the Bible says is okay. Also, the way I see it, marriage isn't really a right. It's a privilege reserved only for those who qualify.

You're right, waving signs and screaming and not doing anything to help women avoid abortion and help children who need homes is wrong. Which is why I've never protested outside a clinic in that manner (I find praying quietly outside a clinic or hospital more dignified and effective). And I strongly believe in the need for generous funding to provide pregnant teenagers, single mothers, families in need and "unwanted" children with financial aid, education, housing, and everything else. We pro-lifers are not quite as thoughtless as you seem to think. I suppose there might be some losers out there. But I've never met anyone like that. Please don't paint us all with the same brush.


Separation of Church and State. Period. The bible doesn't equal laws in our countries and it never will. And you might have that archaic thought process about marriage, but since it's currently granted to all straight couples regardless, you really can't argue that.

Sorry Christy I didn't mean to paint you with the same brush, all I'm saying is that if the Pro-Life movement really wants to win some battles, they actually need to step off the "banning abortions" bandwagon and join up with the Pro-Choice movement on common goals so we can reduce and ultimately eliminate abortions (well, nearly eliminate, we may still have exceptions due to medical and possibly rape) without needing to go through the courts and ban it out right. As of now, banning abortions solves no problems - we need to fix the reasons why people seek abortions in the first place.

Additionally, (which links with your quote below) I think oddly enough that being *Christian* groups can be a deterrent for people to visit in some ways as well because they know they're going to get the "don't have an abortion" answer immediately. closedeyes.gif I'm not saying Planned Parenthood is the best choice either, but that's got to be an issue too. People should be presented with all the options and then presented with TRUTHFUL, positive information as to why keeping it/adoption are the BETTER options (rather than scaring people into not getting an abortion based on largely false information - I don't believe scarring anyone is the right thing to do!)

I really do respect you even though it seems like we butt heads, trust me.

QUOTE(*Christy* @ Jul 5th 2011, 4:18 PM) *

I was thinking about this a bit more. I think one part of the problem could be, in general, that we want to discourage abortion but we're afraid encourage to birth control because we're afraid of it being seen as promoting sex among the unmarried set. I guess we might need to learn to pick our battles. Also, pregnancy out of wedlock carries such a stigma that it discourages us from helping because we don't want to be seen as condoning it. It's a problem. There are Christian ministries that reach out to young mothers and the like, but they're unfunded, under appreciated and not as well known as they ought to be. To be honest, though I know they exist, I couldn't give you a name. Clearly, we're not doing enough. And obviously we need to be fighting for family allowances. The family is the most Important unit in society, we have to support it properly.


This is absolutely a huge issue. There are groups that want to give condoms out in 3rd World countries but they're butting heads with the Vatican over it, and ultimately then the religious communities (often in Central America is where this happens particularly) go with religious rule, meanwhile still having babies that they can't afford to feed wink.gif So yeah, I'd say "pick your battles" is a really good one that people need to be mindful of. Because having 19 children for the Duggars is great, but not so much for an extremely poor person in Ecuador where most of her kids are already living at an orphanage. whistling.gif

QUOTE(1201O @ Jul 5th 2011, 7:19 PM) *

I'm not saying a politician shouldn't be allowed to follow their conscience. I'm saying that passing laws just because it's written somewhere in the bible, is terrifying. Running on a political platform centered entirely around the bible horrifying. Religion should be separate from politics. It's possible to have a conscience, and morals without having to tout the bible as evidence.


yes.gif

This post has been edited by bumnummies: Jul 5th 2011, 6:52 PM


--------------------
MY NAME IS JENN. | COME VISIT ME ON TUMBLR OK? | or TWITTER | VERSION: COLCHELE.
IPB Image
| GLEE: Rachel. Kurt. Blaine. Tina. Santana. Sam. Brittany. And Everyone Else. :) | OH and I make stuff: REDBUBBLE |
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pnkrngrwnnb
post Jul 5th 2011, 6:53 PM
Post #36



**********

Group: Members

Posts: 12,122
Gender: Female
From: Grand Manan, NB, Canada
Fav. Fandom: Channel Awesome



QUOTE(1201O @ Jul 5th 2011, 8:19 PM) *

No, you have no idea of what you talking about. The Bible clearly condones slavery in several different books:
I can keep going and going, would you like more examples? There wasn't just one author talking about slavery in Roman times, theres examples of slavery being condoned all over the bible, even in the New Testament. You can't just use the excuse about "context" in every single one. The Bible even hypocritically condones Murder and Rape in some cases. Yes, I said murder and rape, and I can find plenty of examples to prove that. I find that most Christians have never really read the Bible thoroughly, and they defend a book that they really know little about.

The eternal moral code you are referring to, that all Christians should always follow, regardless of the time period, is supposed to be summed up by the ten commandments. So if this moral code is the only thing thats binding in the bible, than I don't see why you think same sex marriage is immoral. The ten commandments don't condem homosexuality.

The bible is filled with horrific things. It condones a lot of atrocities. But Christianity has INVENTED a lot of excuses over time in order to explain them.




Sorry, I CAN use context for every example. If one does not understand the context in which a portion of the Bible is written, they have no proper understanding of it at all or the Bible as a whole.

On the contrary, homosexuality falls under "You shall not commit adultery." This commandment does not simply refer to infidelity, but also to sexual sin of all types and sorts, homosexuality included. Thank you very much.

Pfff. You clearly hate God's Word. You have no credibility.


--------------------
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sneaky
post Jul 5th 2011, 6:56 PM
Post #37



******

Group: Members

Posts: 985



QUOTE(*Christy* @ Jul 5th 2011, 7:53 PM) *

Sorry, I CAN use context for every example. If one does not understand the context in which a portion of the Bible is written, they have no proper understanding of it at all or the Bible as a whole.

On the contrary, homosexuality falls under "You shall not commit adultery." This commandment does not simply refer to infidelity, but also to sexual sin of all types and sorts, homosexuality included. Thank you very much.

Pfff. You clearly hate God's Word. You have no credibility.


And...The Christian Superiority Complex


--------------------
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pnkrngrwnnb
post Jul 5th 2011, 7:04 PM
Post #38



**********

Group: Members

Posts: 12,122
Gender: Female
From: Grand Manan, NB, Canada
Fav. Fandom: Channel Awesome



QUOTE(sneaky @ Jul 5th 2011, 8:56 PM) *

And...The Christian Superiority Complex


roll2.gif Thanks for that, I needed a good laugh.


--------------------
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
1201O
post Jul 5th 2011, 7:12 PM
Post #39



**********

Group: Members

Posts: 8,570
From: Sur Africa
Fav. AI8: Allison Iraheta
Fav. AI1: Kelly Clarkson
Fav. FAV. Celebrity: Jessica Alba



QUOTE(*Christy* @ Jul 5th 2011, 7:53 PM) *

Sorry, I CAN use context for every example. If one does not understand the context in which a portion of the Bible is written, they have no proper understanding of it at all or the Bible as a whole.

On the contrary, homosexuality falls under "You shall not commit adultery." This commandment does not simply refer to infidelity, but also to sexual sin of all types and sorts, homosexuality included. Thank you very much.

Pfff. You clearly hate God's Word. You have no credibility.

You can't use context for every single one, because than you can use context for EVERYTHING in the bible. THOU SHALL NOT KILL. You can't just go and say "woops, sorry, that was written over a thousands years ago, different time period, it's acceptable to kill now." Plus how do you use context to explain this: "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ."

Nope, that's your interpretation, created to suit your views. No where in the bible does it clearly state that adultery encompasses homosexuality, rather you are choosing to interpret that it does. Using the definitions the latin or hebrew languages, or even the definitions the Bible itself provides in several different passages, homosexuality does NOT equal adultery.

I don't hate "God's" word. I was raised on Christianity, and I believe that God exists, I agree with and respect the Ten Commandments. But that's it(which is why I consider myself agnostic.) The Bible has many good morals written it's pages, but that doesn't mean I'm blind to that fact that there's just as many atrocities in it. I refuse to believe that such a book is God's word. There's no way that's God word.

This post has been edited by 1201O: Jul 5th 2011, 7:20 PM


--------------------
IPB Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bumnummies
post Jul 5th 2011, 7:13 PM
Post #40



**********

Group: Blend Artists

Posts: 41,246
Gender: Female
From: Ontari-ari-ari-oooo.



QUOTE(*Christy* @ Jul 5th 2011, 7:53 PM) *

On the contrary, homosexuality falls under "You shall not commit adultery." This commandment does not simply refer to infidelity, but also to sexual sin of all types and sorts, homosexuality included. Thank you very much.


Adultery: voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than his or her lawful spouse.

Source: Dictionary.com

In other words...... You are mistaken. original.gif


--------------------
MY NAME IS JENN. | COME VISIT ME ON TUMBLR OK? | or TWITTER | VERSION: COLCHELE.
IPB Image
| GLEE: Rachel. Kurt. Blaine. Tina. Santana. Sam. Brittany. And Everyone Else. :) | OH and I make stuff: REDBUBBLE |
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

14 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:



-
Lo-Fi Version 81 Time is now: Nov 23rd 2014, 6:12 AM




We now accept check/money order donations in addition to online donations via PayPal!  Help us pay for our servers, donate to Neurox Media!  Thanks!
Links: Reality TV Links - American Idol | SirLinksalot: American Idol

Powered by: Invision Power Board v2.1.7 © 2014  IPS, Inc.
Licensed to: Neurox Media