Obama Affirms Support for Same-Sex Marriage

[Shotgun 442]

Can't believe this thread made it to 7 pages.

 

The gays pay taxes, they don't negatively affect anyone but themselves by getting married, and allowing them to do so will finally shut them the fuck up.

 

Where's the downside?

[SteVo+ 3,702]

Can't believe this thread made it to 7 pages.

 

The gays pay taxes, they don't negatively affect anyone but themselves by getting married, and allowing them to do so will finally shut them the fuck up.

 

Where's the downside?

 

Pretty sure the "downside" for those who oppose it usually comes down to personal/religious beliefs, which I have no problem with. But this is America, right? What right do we have to tell the gays they can't get married? Anybody who cites religion as a counter to that question need only remember "freedom of religion."

[Duck Fallas 209]

Can't believe this thread made it to 7 pages.

 

The gays pay taxes, they don't negatively affect anyone but themselves by getting married, and allowing them to do so will finally shut them the fuck up.

 

Where's the downside?

The downside is that they will get married....which is apparently the most horrible act they can commit.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

This is one of the reason why I quarrel with fellow Christians more than I do atheists or any other (non) religious group.

 

I grew up in a Christian (Catholic) home. I went through the religious education courses all the way through high school. I have gone through four of the seven sacraments... And I even thought religious education courses for many years before I left my church for differences in my personal faith and the religion they have their educators preach to young children....

 

But so many "Christians" that I know, even some in my own family, are just SO SO extremely judgemental. They look down on others for what they have and what others don't. They preach bible verses, but don't know their meanings and judge other peoples actions as if they do no wrong.

 

It frustrates me to no end.

 

Because the God that I know. The God that I believe in and have a connection with does not look down on a group of people because they are black or white, heavy set or thin, tall or short, gay or straight.

 

Not only is that not the God that I know... That's not a God I could connect with spiritually.

 

Using God or religion as a crutch for hatred is everything that is wrong with organized religion in society.

Edited May 13, 2012 by Favre4Ever

[Shotgun 442]

Pretty sure the "downside" for those who oppose it usually comes down to personal/religious beliefs, which I have no problem with. But this is America, right? What right do we have to tell the gays they can't get married? Anybody who cites religion as a counter to that question need only remember "freedom of religion."

 

By "what's the downside?" I mean what's the downside to others. Two gay guys getting married isn't going to negatively affect anyone. There is no downside to an outside individual, only a figment of one.

[SteVo+ 3,702]

By "what's the downside?" I mean what's the downside to others. Two gay guys getting married isn't going to negatively affect anyone. There is no downside to an outside individual, only a figment of one.

 

I agree wholeheartedly. I was just trying to say that I think those who oppose same-sex marriage do so from a standpoint of believing it to be morally wrong, and not so much that they believe it will have an adverse impact on society, the economy, etc.

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

Thanks for the summary and no worries on the length of the post, I just wanted to be sure I understood your position. It's seems natural enough given your religious views.

 

Do you think one day Christians will accept homosexuality? I know the Catholics (Pope) have changed their view on evolution given the scientific evidence. Maybe homosexuality is evolutions way of population control. Do you believe homosexuality is natural or an abomination or choice/lifestyle?

 

I think being a Christian, you can never accept homosexuality, and it's a subject that can't evolve.

 

I know there is supposedly 'science' behind it -homosexuality- (or is there?) and I welcome anybody who knows the science or knows a site where that science is presented and it's legit to give it to me. Cause Im always curious.

 

But the Bible is my guide book even though I know some of you don't agree with the Bible being as legit as I and other Christians (might) consider it. And it's clear on this subject, it's a choice/lifestyle as well as it's an abomination. And actually, ss a Christian, i'm not even sure we can be for population control.

Edited May 13, 2012 by DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F

[BoneKrusher+ 1,276]

as others have said, this was a move for Votes.

Good for the Gay community.

they vote, work and pay taxes same as Christian folk.

[NaTaS+ 958]

But the Bible is my guide book even though I know some of you don't agree with the Bible being as legit as I and other Christians (might) consider it. And it's clear on this subject, it's a choice/lifestyle as well as it's an abomination. And actually, ss a Christian, i'm not even sure we can be for population control.

 

Is it defined as a choice in the bible because they just didnt have the science back then to know different? Here is a study to show that homosexuality is genetic, not a choice. Here is another to show that a gay gene was found in mice.

[BwareDWare94 723]

I was raised Catholic but I even know that it's not OK to oppose homosexuality. It's just not. Not even in the eyes of God, because he puts forth the judgment. Not us. I don't oppose it, and don't even support the Bible's stance on it, but technically it is a sin for us to worry about other's "sins" (in the context of the Bible) more so than our own. You can't judge others. You can't think you're better than others. You want the key to Heaven? Humility. Be humble before God and among your peers. Forget about judgment and just treat each other the right way.

[Thanatos 2,847]

I was raised Catholic but I even know that it's not OK to oppose homosexuality. It's just not. Not even in the eyes of God, because he puts forth the judgment. Not us. I don't oppose it, and don't even support the Bible's stance on it, but technically it is a sin for us to worry about other's "sins" (in the context of the Bible) more so than our own. You can't judge others. You can't think you're better than others. You want the key to Heaven? Humility. Be humble before God and among your peers. Forget about judgment and just treat each other the right way.

 

I disagree. Not only with your statement about it being a sin for us to worry about other's sins, assuming I'm understanding you correctly, but also with the statement that you can't judge others.

 

That is incorrect, as I outlined in my previous post.

 

Nor is the key to heaven humility. A humble person is a great thing, but you're not going to get into Heaven merely because of that humility.

 

As well, if you believe that this God gave you a copy of his instructions, and in part of it he calls homosexuality a sin, it is perfectly logical to oppose it.

 

Is it defined as a choice in the bible because they just didnt have the science back then to know different? Here is a study to show that homosexuality is genetic, not a choice. Here is another to show that a gay gene was found in mice.

 

First of all, the study about mice is not applicable to humans, as it says in the study. The article does not go into much detail on that, but they are decidedly different sexual responses.

 

Scientists have long sought after a link between homosexual orientation and genes, however this particular research does nothing to suggest there’s the same connection in humans - it just proves there is in rodents. By deleting the enzyme-producing gene, the scientists believe that they caused the female mice to be exposed to extra oestrogen, by preventing their brains from filtering out the hormone.

The thing is, while oestrogen masculinises the brain in mice, it does not have the same effect in humans.

 

Secondly, just because there is a gene that predisposes a person to being gay does not mean there is no choice involved at all, ever. There may be some people who due to a combination of factors, are simply and only attracted to members of their same sex. But to try to make a blanket statement that anyone with this gene is automatically going to be a homosexual, regardless of the choices they make, (and saying that they're simply pretending otherwise if they say they aren't homosexual) is doing a disservice to them.

 

This comment is particularly appropriate:

NewsFlash: Gene found for those who prefer paper over plastic

 

scientist:"I knew all along it was genetic, those people"

 

In a related story the gene has been found in people whom freely say "Hello" to their neighbors. Scientist: "I knew all along it was genetic, those people".

 

point: this issue is always presented as if of all social behavior and displays of appreciation for one hug of this person is normal and another is "GENETIC". Bullshit.

Edited May 13, 2012 by Thanatos19

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

I was raised Catholic but I even know that it's not OK to oppose homosexuality. It's justice not. Not even in the eyes of God, because he puts forth the judgment. Not us. I don't oppose it, and don't even support the Bible's stance on it, but technically it is a sin for us to worry about other's "sins" (in the context of the Bible) more so than our own. You can't judge others. You can't think you're better than others. You want the key to Heaven? Humility. Be humble before God and among your peers. Forget about judgment and just treat each other the right way.

 

......

 

Honestly, idk why I decided to read this whole post. I should of stopped after reading the third sentence.

[NaTaS+ 958]

 

 

First of all, the study about mice is not applicable to humans, as it says in the study. The article does not go into much detail on that, but they are decidedly different sexual responses.

 

 

 

Secondly, just because there is a gene that predisposes a person to being gay does not mean there is no choice involved at all, ever. There may be some people who due to a combination of factors, are simply and only attracted to members of their same sex. But to try to make a blanket statement that anyone with this gene is automatically going to be a homosexual, regardless of the choices they make, (and saying that they're simply pretending otherwise if they say they aren't homosexual) is doing a disservice to them.

 

This comment is particularly appropriate:

 

 

I never said the study about mice was applicable to humans. I said there was a gay gene found in mice and I ended it there. I also never argued that just having a gene demands that you will be homosexual. I'm not sure what you're arguing here. These studies show that homosexuality is biological.

 

Bottom line: I was discussing the matter of choice to DMac presented scientific studies that shows that homosexuality is linked to genetics <period>.

[Thanatos 2,847]

I never said the study about mice was applicable to humans. I said there was a gay gene found in mice and I ended it there. I also never argued that just having a gene demands that you will be homosexual. I'm not sure what you're arguing here. These studies show that homosexuality is biological.

 

Bottom line: I was discussing the matter of choice to DMac presented scientific studies that shows that homosexuality is linked to genetics <period>.

 

And the point of my response is that simply because it is linked to genetics does not mean its not a choice.

 

The gene only predisposes people. It does not "make" them gay, at least not in all cases.

[NaTaS+ 958]

And the point of my response is that simply because it is linked to genetics does not mean its not a choice.

 

The gene only predisposes people. It does not "make" them gay, at least not in all cases.

 

Where in the fuck did I say the gene makes people gay? What the fuck are you arguing? You just typing to type?

 

First you imply that I was saying genes found in mice is the same as genes found in humans and now you're implying that I'm arguing something I'm not.

 

I think you're just caught up in trying to debate with something, anything and you've lost your way.

 

My posts was a side conversation with DMac and you butt in blabbering that having the 'gay' gene doesnt make someone gay. I have not once said it did. I'm not sure that anyone said it forced the person to be gay? There are plenty of genes found in people that are dormant, its a biological fact.

 

Homosexuality has been scientifically shown to be biological factor while presenting some articles to DMac. That is all I said. Good lord man, read.

[Thanatos 2,847]

Where in the fuck did I say the gene makes people gay? What the fuck are you arguing? You just typing to type?

 

First you imply that I was saying genes found in mice is the same as genes found in humans and now you're implying that I'm arguing something I'm not.

 

I think you're just caught up in trying to debate with something, anything and you've lost your way.

 

My posts was a side conversation with DMac and you butt in blabbering that having the 'gay' gene doesnt make someone gay. I have not once said it did. I'm not sure that anyone said it forced the person to be gay? There are plenty of genes found in people that are dormant, its a biological fact.

 

Homosexuality has been scientifically shown to be biological factor while presenting some articles to DMac. That is all I said. Good lord man, read.

 

Woah, dude, chill. We were having a civil conversation here, no need to blow your top like that. I'm not butting in at all, we were having a discussion between multiple people in pretty much the entirety of this thread. I was unaware you and Dmac were having a private conversation that you didn't want anyone else weighing in on.

 

I was simply clarifying the point of my response. I wasn't implying anything. I was merely pointing out what the article actually said, since the point of your post seemed to be that homosexuality was genetic, not a choice, and you put forward those two studies as evidence of it:

 

Here is a study to show that homosexuality is genetic, not a choice.

 

Exactly what you said in your post. So I replied saying that just because it's linked to genetics, does not mean it's not a choice.

[blotsfan 2,112]

Why would people choose to be attracted to people that the attraction means they're gonna be treated like second class citizens?

[NaTaS+ 958]

You just seem like a guy who wants to argue, Thantos. I am chill, I'm not jumping around my house upset about some interwebz disagreement, but I wanted to get my point across to you. It seemed you were so stuck on being right about something, you were ignoring my posts. You're either implying I'm speaking in absolutes or you're speaking in absolutes. I cant tell, nor do I really care.

 

To say being homosexual is a choice is to say they can choose not to be homosexual. I didnt make a choice to be hetero, I just am. It's in my biological makeup. For someone that is homosexual, it is in their biological makeup. They have active chemistry that destines them to be attracted to someone of the same sex. Again, the point of the articles was to show that there is a biological factor to being homosexual.

 

Poor DMac has been defending his stance all over this thread and I was just trying to --on the side-- make sure I understood his position. My posts were public, indeed, but I wasnt posting to create my own position or debate with you. Obviously it's public and you have every right to reply, but it seemed to me like you were arguing just to argue and I had no idea where you were coming from. It seemed completely out of left field.

[Thanatos 2,847]

You just seem like a guy who wants to argue, Thantos. I am chill, I'm not jumping around my house upset about some interwebz disagreement, but I wanted to get my point across to you. It seemed you were so stuck on being right about something, you were ignoring my posts. You're either implying I'm speaking in absolutes or you're speaking in absolutes. I cant tell, nor do I really care.

 

To say being homosexual is a choice is to say they can choose not to be homosexual. I didnt make a choice to be hetero, I just am. It's in my biological makeup. For someone that is homosexual, it is in their biological makeup. They have active chemistry that destines them to be attracted to someone of the same sex. Again, the point of the articles was to show that there is a biological factor to being homosexual.

 

Poor DMac has been defending his stance all over this thread and I was just trying to --on the side-- make sure I understood his position. My posts were public, indeed, but I wasnt posting to create my own position or debate with you. Obviously it's public and you have every right to reply, but it seemed to me like you were arguing just to argue and I had no idea where you were coming from. It seemed completely out of left field.

 

Perhaps chill sent the wrong message. Be civil may have been more on target.

 

I may not be coming off completely clear, perhaps. I'm operating on five hours of sleep over the past two days.

 

Anyhow, I'm mastering in philosophy. We're in a thread that has pretty much been a debate thread the entire time. So yeah, I like to have good debates, but it's not just to argue, it's to learn stuff. I have had my mind changed debating with people. I have changed other's minds debating with people. I never argue for the sake of argument alone unless I'm just trying to piss someone off. I'm not. I did not understand what you were trying to say. I still don't, for that matter. Obviously I misunderstood, since you think it came out of left field, and I thought it followed directly from your post.

 

You say you aren't speaking in absolutes, but then you say that they're "destined" to be homosexual, and that they cannot choose not to be homosexual.

 

I'm saying it's a variety of factors at play here and that merely because its in their biological makeup doesn't mean they will be gay. For that matter, I don't think heterosexuality is purely without choice, either. I do think a person chooses their sexuality, period, not just a homosexual. You may be heavily predisposed towards one sex or the other because of your genes/environment/whatever, but there is still choice involved.

Edited May 14, 2012 by Thanatos19

[NaTaS+ 958]

So you're claim is that the natural state of human beings is bi-sexual?

[Thanatos 2,847]

So you're claim is that the natural state of human beings is bi-sexual?

 

In a very broad sense, yes.

 

Just most people are heavily predisposed towards heterosexuality, probably since we need heterosexuality in order to continue to exist as a species, and bury the other side so deep it never sees the light of day.

 

Then there is a very small minority that is the opposite, and a larger minority that is fine with both sexes, or perhaps, they are predisposed neither towards one side or the other. Obviously, there are people in-between those three very broad categories as well.

Edited May 14, 2012 by Thanatos19

[Duck Fallas 209]

I for sure didn't CHOOSE to be straight, it is simply how I was wired before I was even born. Can any one of us really legitimately claim that they are straight by choice?

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

Being that homosexuality is a sin in my book and according to the Bible, and we are born sinners, we are probably born with the choice to be homosexual... But nobody is born gay yo (at least that's what makes sense considering the Bible).

 

By the way Natas, I just saw you link, and ima read it when I get the chance.

Edited May 14, 2012 by DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F

[Duck Fallas 209]

I guess there really is never going to be a true answer as to whether or not being homosexual is a choice. Kinda like the whole thing about the existence of "god", if you believe in it (god), then there is a ton of "proof", but if you don't believe, there is no proof at all.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

So, Dmac.. Do you still live by the Old Testament then?