Any Dudes Wanna Get Married?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
181

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
Nope. Historically, marriage began as a legal institution.
[/quote]
In what history? Game of Thrones?

[quote]

In feudal times it was a way for the landowning elite to accumulate more land and pass that land on to “legitimate” heirs. [/quote]

Yes, for the .00001% of people who were nobility. That said, the only records of the same were kept in Churches or Shuls, or whatever.

Indeed, the right of nobles to be “noble” was the “Divine Right of Kings,” granted to them by the Roman Catholic Church (most typically).

[quote]
Marriages were arranged - love was irrelevant. [/quote]

Yes, by the ladies of the Shul or Church or whatever.

Cue “Matchmaker, Matchmaker, make me a match.”

[quote]
Only children born of the marriage could inherit the land. If a young nobleman decided to have a romp in the hay with a cute peasant, any child conceived from this little romp was illegitimate and could not inherit anything. [/quote]

And this is relevant to the 99 44/100% of people who were not noble, how, exactly?
Moreover, inherance was an issue for the religious courts, not legal courts.

Maybe in Dungeons and Dragons fantasy land.

182

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Ok, I’ll repost the question (and context), and let’s - for once - have a good, honest answer:

[i]And, of course, I always offer this up, but gay marriage advocates always shrink away from it - if gay marriage is the equivalent to the Civil Rights issue of inter-racial marriage, then ipso facto that must mean that opponents to gay marriage are the moral equivalent to opponents of inter-racial marriage during the Civil Rights movement.

Okey dokey, well, then - the black community overwhelmingly disapproves of gay marriage. So, of course, based on the above, that means that black Americans are the moral equivalent to those that opposed inter-racial marriage. They have to be. They are the modern KKK on this issue.

So, why won’t gay marriage advocates just come up and say this to black Americans?[/i]

C’mon, enough whistling past the issue. Let’s call a bigot a bigot.

Let’s go, gay marriage advocates. Time’s wasting. If gays who can’t marry are “victims”, then the most sizeable chunk of “oppressors” come from the African American community.

Let’s have it. Surely, armed with The Truth ™, you are perfectly comfortable calling out these modern versions of Bull Connors and Klansmen?

[/quote]

Not sure where you got the impression that people get a free ride for discriminating against gays, simply because they have been discriminated against in the past. If anything, they are the worst of bigots because of the added hypocrisy. That’s like saying a Jew is justified in hating blacks, because of the historical persecution of his own people.

183

[quote]forlife wrote:
Those same religious reasons allowed the founding fathers to own slaves. Maybe they’re not as pristine as you seem to believe.[/quote]

Actually, both the Torah and the Christian scriptures merely tolerate slavery — setting basic standards for treatment of slaves, encouraging freedom of slaves, and the like.

People often take (and took) statements out of context (including as an excuse to take slaves), when the reality was both scriptures simply tolerated slavery as am unpleasant fact of life in the Bronze Age/early Iron Age, and then set codes of conduct related to the same.

Saying the Bible approved of slavery would be like saying it approved of leperosy or any of the other horrid things of the time. Yes, lepers and slaves had specific requirements. That does not mean leporasy or slavery were good things.

184

[quote]forlife wrote:

Not sure where you got the impression that people get a free ride for discriminating against gays, simply because they have been discriminated against in the past. If anything, they are the worst of bigots because of the added hypocrisy. That’s like saying a Jew is justified in hating blacks, because of the historical persecution of his own people. [/quote]

Don’t rearrange your answer to suit a question that wasn’t asked. My question doesn’t “have an impression” - I am asking gay marriage advocates a question seeking a direct answer.

Are modern black Americans that oppose gay marriage the moral equivalent of the racist whites that opposed inter-racial marriage?

Yes? Or no? One word - let me know.

185

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:
Those same religious reasons allowed the founding fathers to own slaves. Maybe they’re not as pristine as you seem to believe.[/quote]

Actually, both the Torah and the Christian scriptures merely tolerate slavery — setting basic standards for treatment of slaves, encouraging freedom of slaves, and the like.

People often take (and took) statements out of context (including as an excuse to take slaves), when the reality was both scriptures simply tolerated slavery as am unpleasant fact of life in the Bronze Age/early Iron Age, and then set codes of conduct related to the same.

Saying the Bible approved of slavery would be like saying it approved of leperosy or any of the other horrid things of the time. Yes, lepers and slaves had specific requirements. That does not mean leporasy or slavery were good things.[/quote]

Many (including me) would argue that tolerating slavery is a violation of morality. If the founding fathers were so pristine as Tiribulus seems to believe, they should have outlawed slavery from the outset.

186

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

Not sure where you got the impression that people get a free ride for discriminating against gays, simply because they have been discriminated against in the past. If anything, they are the worst of bigots because of the added hypocrisy. That’s like saying a Jew is justified in hating blacks, because of the historical persecution of his own people. [/quote]

Don’t rearrange your answer to suit a question that wasn’t asked. My question doesn’t “have an impression” - I am asking gay marriage advocates a question seeking a direct answer.

Are modern black Americans that oppose gay marriage the moral equivalent of the racist whites that opposed inter-racial marriage?

Yes? Or no? One word - let me know.[/quote]

How could you possibly miss the answer from my response?

YES, YES, YES, YES, YES

187

[quote]forlife wrote:

How could you possibly miss the answer from my response?

YES, YES, YES, YES, YES[/quote]

Excellent.

Now, what have you done to communicate this to the African American community - this consolidated bulwark of bigotry?

You have no greater foe in your state of Texas than black Americans, so surely someone as passionate as you has done something to single out black Americans for this crime of hate?

Let’s hear what you have done.

188

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:
Those same religious reasons allowed the founding fathers to own slaves. Maybe they’re not as pristine as you seem to believe.[/quote]

Actually, both the Torah and the Christian scriptures merely tolerate slavery — setting basic standards for treatment of slaves, encouraging freedom of slaves, and the like.

People often take (and took) statements out of context (including as an excuse to take slaves), when the reality was both scriptures simply tolerated slavery as am unpleasant fact of life in the Bronze Age/early Iron Age, and then set codes of conduct related to the same.

Saying the Bible approved of slavery would be like saying it approved of leperosy or any of the other horrid things of the time. Yes, lepers and slaves had specific requirements. That does not mean leporasy or slavery were good things.[/quote]

No it’s really not the same thing at all. No one forced leprosy upon another human being.

The difference is one is an immoral act and the other was a common sickness at the time.

If these books are said to be divinely inspired, why would god tolerate such an immoral act?

Even the passages that are outlined in the Bible are nothing short of barbaric. Saying that scriptures simply tolerated slavery is nothing but spin.

The Bible permitted owners to beat their slaves severely, even to the point of killing them. However, as long as the slave lingered longer than 24 hours before dying of the abuse, the owner was not regarded as having committed a crime, because – after all – the slave was his property.

189

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

How could you possibly miss the answer from my response?

YES, YES, YES, YES, YES[/quote]

Excellent.

Now, what have you done to communicate this to the African American community - this consolidated bulwark of bigotry?

You have no greater foe in your state of Texas than black Americans, so surely someone as passionate as you has done something to single out black Americans for this crime of hate?

Let’s hear what you have done.
[/quote]

I’ve never given anyone a free pass for being a bigot. It doesn’t matter what a person’s race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation is. Bigotry is bigotry, period.

190

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

How could you possibly miss the answer from my response?

YES, YES, YES, YES, YES[/quote]

Excellent.

Now, what have you done to communicate this to the African American community - this consolidated bulwark of bigotry?

You have no greater foe in your state of Texas than black Americans, so surely someone as passionate as you has done something to single out black Americans for this crime of hate?

Let’s hear what you have done.
[/quote]

I’ve never given anyone a free pass for being a bigot. It doesn’t matter what a person’s race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation is. Bigotry is bigotry, period.
[/quote]

Well, you dodged that question rather clumsily.

191

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Grneyes wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
IMHO Gay marriage is wrong. IT should be called something else…like same sex union. Because it will never, ever in a million years be marriage by definition. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Give em rights all day long, but to disgrace the meaning of marriage is unacceptable. [/quote]

I couldn’t care less what you call it. I just want equal legal rights with my partner.[/quote]

You have equal rights already. Each of us have the option of marrying any women who will say yes. That is EQUAL rights. What you want are special rights. [/quote]

No, no he doesn’t. In a hospital situation, he does not have the right to be with his partner or make choices for him if the partner is incapacitated. They will go to his IMMEDIATE family, which would be the partner’s parents. A heterosexual’s IMMEDIATE family is considered their spouse, which he would not be considered. He’s just a lover or a partner. The word “spouse” has a lot more power than those words. That is not equal rights.
[/quote]

We’ve rehashed this countless times on this site. We all have equal rights. My best buddy who I’ve lifted weights with for years can’t have a say when I’m in the hospital either (good thing he’d tell them to pull the plug:). The point is we all have the same rights. Homosexuals want special rights under the law.
[/quote]

No, they want the SAME rights. Why can’t a gay couple have the same rights as a straight couple? [/quote]

They currently do have the same rights.

192

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:
FYI-- The world has enough people! We should discourage procreation. The only people having kids in America are the poor and the Mormons anyway.[/quote]

So, what you’re saying is you fear poor people.[/quote]

No, he just hates anyone that isn’t like him. He’s a bigot.

193

[quote]forlife wrote:

I’ve never given anyone a free pass for being a bigot. It doesn’t matter what a person’s race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation is. Bigotry is bigotry, period.
[/quote]

That is an answer to a question that wasn’t asked. Answer the question presented to you. Surely, with respect to the most bigoted of the bigots - percentages of opposition to gay marriage in the black community are off-the-charts, especially when compared to whites - you have done something to stand up to these evil people?

194

[quote]forlife wrote:<<< They quoted the bible, bemoaned the imminent fall of society, and called people to repentance just like you are doing here.[/quote]They twisted the bible and in many cases they KNEW they were twisting the bible. Even Bob Jones University had to acknowledge that they were extrapolating to get their prohibition of interracial marriage, going so far as to flatly acknowledge that the bible doesn’t actually SAY what they were holding to.

There are somewhat complex historical issues of race in here none of which have anything to do with homosexuality AT ALL. YOU are forcing an analogy where one simply does not and CANNOT ever exist. Both testaments clearly and plainly in language a first grader can understand condemn sex between members of the same gender, male or female, as an abomination in the sight of God the holy designer/creator. Neither testament does this with interracial marriage. Don’t know what else to tell ya except… you guessed it, repent, forsake your sin, trust His Word and live a life abundant in His grace forever. I am your friend elder forlife. I think even you know that by now. No more time at the moment.

195

An interesting fact, gay marriage has been legal in the Netherlands now for over ten years. And statistics indicate that the average duration of a homosexual union to be one and a half years!

They are a promiscuous bunch. But then we all know that and most homosexuals will not deny it. In fact,

Here are just a few statistics for those who have bought into the pro homosexual media slant:

The failure of gay marriage to gain more steam in the few states that allow it will in all likely hood be caused by their own actions.

196

[quote]ZEB wrote:
An interesting fact, gay marriage has been legal in the Netherlands now for over ten years. And statistics indicate that the average duration of a homosexual union to be one and a half years!

They are a promiscuous bunch. But then we all know that and most homosexuals will not deny it. In fact,

Here are just a few statistics for those who have bought into the pro homosexual media slant:

The failure of gay marriage in the few states that allow it will in all likely hood be caused by their own actions.

[/quote]

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Ontario for 8 years. Divorce rates have not changed in that time period.

197

Here is a great article on how the media spins the news in a pro gay fashion:

http://www.fair.org/extra/0409/gay-marriage-consensus.html

One excerpt from the article:

198

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

I’ve never given anyone a free pass for being a bigot. It doesn’t matter what a person’s race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation is. Bigotry is bigotry, period.
[/quote]

That is an answer to a question that wasn’t asked. Answer the question presented to you. Surely, with respect to the most bigoted of the bigots - percentages of opposition to gay marriage in the black community are off-the-charts, especially when compared to whites - you have done something to stand up to these evil people?
[/quote]

I vote for people that advocate equality, and trust the civil rights process to continue progressing as it has done historically.

If you don’t like it, feel free to stand against the tide. I’m not going to change your mind, and have no need to do so.

199

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
An interesting fact, gay marriage has been legal in the Netherlands now for over ten years. And statistics indicate that the average duration of a homosexual union to be one and a half years!

They are a promiscuous bunch. But then we all know that and most homosexuals will not deny it. In fact,

Here are just a few statistics for those who have bought into the pro homosexual media slant:

The failure of gay marriage in the few states that allow it will in all likely hood be caused by their own actions.

[/quote]

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Ontario for 8 years. Divorce rates have not changed in that time period.
[/quote]

In Ontario, like other places that have legalized homosexual unions, there is a big rush to get married when gay marriage laws are passed. Then it slows down to a trickle and in Ontario’s case it practically stopped. Ontario is one of those areas where not many homosexuals have actually gotten married. So I guess that wouldn’t effect the divorce rate would it?

200

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:<<< They quoted the bible, bemoaned the imminent fall of society, and called people to repentance just like you are doing here.[/quote]They twisted the bible and in many cases they KNEW they were twisting the bible. Even Bob Jones University had to acknowledge that they were extrapolating to get their prohibition of interracial marriage, going so far as to flatly acknowledge that the bible doesn’t actually SAY what they were holding to.

There are somewhat complex historical issues of race in here none of which have anything to do with homosexuality AT ALL. YOU are forcing an analogy where one simply does not and CANNOT ever exist. Both testament clearly and plainly in language a first grader can understand condemn sex between members of the same gender, male or female, as an abomination in the sight of God the holy designer/creator. Neither testament does this with interracial marriage. Don’t know what else to tell ya except… you guessed it, repent, forsake your sin, trust His Word and live a life abundant in His grace forever. I am your friend elder forlife. I think even you know that by now. No more time at the moment.
[/quote]

I would gladly repent, dear Tiribulus, if you would but provide reliable evidence that your homophobic god is real. Lacking that, don’t be surprised that I choose happiness over your fearfully vaporous condemnations.