[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
The rate of divorce has been growing a long time throughout Europe, especially northern europe. It has nothing to do with homosexuality, how could it?[/quote]
Um…what? It definitely correlates, if anyone gets to define marriage, usually the definition of marriage just goes right out the door.[/quote]
The rate of divorce has been rising for a long time, long before there was any open talk about gay marriage.[/quote]
Yes, and we’re trying to reverse the damage to marriage, not propagate its demise.[/quote]
Yes, I understand that, but if gays marry or not, we are talking about 2-4% of the population. People marry all the time just for the shere fun of it, well, at least women seem to enjoy it. The worrysome part is people divorcing, especially people with kids, not people getting married and you will definitely not remedy that by worrying about gays that want a stable relationship.
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:<<< if gays marry or not, we are talking about 2-4% of the population. >>>[/quote]No, were talking about fundamentally redefining THE foundational relationship and institution upon which all other earthly ones are built. >>>[quote]kaaleppi wrote:gays that want a stable relationship.[/quote]They can do whatever they want. Have ceremonies among themselves, call themselves husband and husband (or wife for that matter), whatever they want. If their relationship is stable then my approval and a societal imprimatur is not needed. But that’s not what they want. They want to force the recognition of their chosen lifestyle upon the definition of marriage and family. I reject that because God rejects that.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:<<< Why don’t the two of you unlock from your religious tryst and rebut his points? Or do we just point fingers around here and go “nah nah nan nah nah”?[/quote]Look man no offense, seriously, but you are new around here and all this has been gone over one thousand times. My fingers are numb from retyping.[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:<<< No. I don’t see that. “Being black IS God’s created order for people who are and is void of moral content.” I can see it if I strain but really, you think this is a well constructed sentence?[/quote]Fair enough, I can’t tell you what you see. Do you however now see what I meant and believe that I meant it? Capped did. Do you agree with me on that point?
For the record I asked a friend of mine this morning at church who is very black (24 years old) what he would think if I told him that “being black is utterly void of moral content”? He looked at me sorta smiling and puzzled and said “ok, why would I ever think you believed otherwise”?
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:<<< Tiribulus, do you admit that it’s possible for a person to honestly believe something that is not true, as a result of them starting from the premise that it is true and only accepting “evidence” that fits their conclusion and ignoring all evidence that doesn’t?[/quote]Uh… yep. Evey single last human being since Adam save for Jesus of Nazareth alone is born in that very condition and remains there until resurrected by the grace and mercy of their creator.
[/quote]
You have no proof for that beyond your own interpretation of something that happened to you, that you have no other explanation for.
Like I said before, you don’t think its funny that you, living in America, where Christianity is the most popular religion, are “elected” by the god of christianity?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
But that’s not what they want. They want to force the recognition of their chosen lifestyle upon the definition of marriage and family. I reject that because God rejects that.
[/quote]
I understand your point, tirib, and I might disagree a tad. But, big but, marriage is already rotten, you know it, and marriage is not saved by fighting some outside enemy. It is rotten from inside, if it has ever been what it has been supposed to be, we might disagree in that too. Your point of view is that of a gallant knight that is more interested in purity than anything else.
“Gay Marriage: Traditional Marriage Predates State and Church”
I haven’t read the thread save for it’s ballsy premise, which is, like neary every christian thread in PWI utterly laughable from a historical point of view:
The concept of a “traditional marriage” is hogwash.
It’s like believing that two thousand years ago, little children wrote letters to Santa in December.
Adorable thought, and it could look convincingly real in Hollywood movies. But nonsense because there is no historical equivalent.
Same with the relatively modern and utterly flawed concept of christian marriage.
It wasn’t like this. AT ALL.
For instance, throughout the european middle ages, the vast majority (!) of marriages was being cunducted like this:
“Lassie, I thought… will you by my wife?!”
-“Of course I want to! Oh Balthasar!”
They kiss, then do it another time in the hay. Now they are married if their families aren’t opposed.
Of course the clergy was furious and gnashed their teeth, but there was no church involved whatsoever for the majority of marriages.
And especially until syphilis had it’s big outbreaks, people were often far more carefree with sex then today, and also, consequently, with their “marriages”.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:<<< Why don’t the two of you unlock from your religious tryst and rebut his points? Or do we just point fingers around here and go “nah nah nan nah nah”?[/quote]Look man no offense, seriously, but you are new around here and all this has been gone over one thousand times. My fingers are numb from retyping.[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:<<< No. I don’t see that. “Being black IS God’s created order for people who are and is void of moral content.” I can see it if I strain but really, you think this is a well constructed sentence?[/quote]Fair enough, I can’t tell you what you see. Do you however now see what I meant and believe that I meant it? Capped did. Do you agree with me on that point?
For the record I asked a friend of mine this morning at church who is very black (24 years old) what he would think if I told him that “being black is utterly void of moral content”? He looked at me sorta smiling and puzzled and said “ok, why would I ever think you believed otherwise”? [/quote]
Jesus H. Fucking Christ. The fucking sentence is tortured! You can’t see that?
What the fuck is “being black is God’s created order for people who are”? And unto that tortured piece of literature, you bridge it with “and is void of moral content”. Stop acting as if you’ve just written some eloquent piece that I can’t understand. It was awkward. I still don’t know what the fuck you mean by “being black is God’s created order for people who are” but if I stare long enough, and tease it enough, and consider it long enough, I can barely make out the fact that you claim that whatever preceded “and is void of moral content” is, in fact, void of moral content - whatever the fuck that preceded it meant.
And if your fingers hurt, or anyone else for that matter, just refrain from posting. The guy took the time and consideration to give a thoughtful reply which, under any reasonable analysis, on its merits is more thoughtful than referring to your God as the “sky wizard”. If you don’t want to engage Maverick, disengage.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:<<< What the fuck is “being black is God’s created order for people who are?” >>>[/quote]If one is black then it is because God ordained that varying ethnic categories exist among those creatures made in His image and in their case black was God’s blessed choice for them. [quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:And unto that tortured piece of literature, you bridge it with “and is void of moral content”. >>>[/quote]A person’s race or ethnicity says exactly nothing about their moral character in itself. Is that better? Do you agree now? [quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:<<< And if your fingers hurt, or anyone else for that matter, just refrain from posting. >>>[/quote]Or, I could simply say what I want. Just like you. [quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:<<< The guy took the time and consideration to give a thoughtful reply which, under any reasonable analysis, on its merits is more thoughtful than referring to your God as the “sky wizard”. If you don’t want to engage Maverick, disengage. [/quote]The guy wrote the latest in a long line of canned shallow hatchet jobs on biblical thought and history to which I will not at this time type out yet another response. It was nominally more thoughtful than saying "sky wizard though. I’ll grant that.
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:<<< Your point of view is that of a gallant knight that is more interested in purity than anything else.[/quote]My point is that God in the beginning, before the introduction of sin into the Earth, ordained that a marriage consist of one man and one woman while both were alive. Christ not only restored, but further exalted that institution to reflect the glory of His marriage to His church bride (Ephesians 5:22 and following). Man’s uneven, inconsistent, abhorrent practice, total ignorance or utter rejection of this is entirely irrelevant.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:<<< You have no proof for that beyond your own interpretation of something that happened to you, that you have no other explanation for. >>>[/quote]Not by your standards no, but I have the explanation that is not merely satisfactory to me, but totally unavoidable. >>>[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote: <<<Like I said before, you don’t think its funny that you, living in America, where Christianity is the most popular religion, are “elected” by the god of christianity? [/quote]LOL. What I believe, though it once was, is definitely not the most popular expression of religion OR Christianity in America. This country would not be the decaying putrefying caricature of itself that it is if it were. I do not find it funny. I find it unthinkably merciful and loving that a weak debauched abomonoid like me could not only have my debt paid for and be declared not guilty, but then be taken in as son, brother and bride by the king and judge. Regardless of what country it was made known to me in.
You’re making arguments using scriptures from your sci-fi book. On top of that, you are historically inaccurate as “traditional marriage” a is relatively recent social institution. By and large, marriages were arranged and love had little to do with it. It was all about keeping wealth and power within certain nobility or blood lines.
Have any of you looked at polling data from the younger generations attitudes toward gay marriage? Me neither and I’m not in the mood to hunt it down. However I understand that its overwhelmingly in favor. Now go ahead and speak condescendingly about the opinions of high-school kids but I don’t think their opinions are going to change much as they grow up and become the fat middle swath of the electorate.
[quote]Eli B wrote:
Have any of you looked at polling data from the younger generations attitudes toward gay marriage? Me neither and I’m not in the mood to hunt it down. However I understand that its overwhelmingly in favor. Now go ahead and speak condescendingly about the opinions of high-school kids but I don’t think their opinions are going to change much as they grow up and become the fat middle swath of the electorate.[/quote]
NO NO NO ELI! Don’t get Zeb started on High school kids!!! Apart from the ‘overwhelming liberal media bias’ that’s his favourite subject to talk about!
Florelius glad you enjoyed the blackadder clip it’s one of my favourite shows. And Bodyguard’s Good Will Hunting Clip is an awesome scene.
And I have nothing more to say because Tick said it far more eloquently than I did and the ‘responses’ to his argument sum up the opposing view
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
The guy wrote the latest in a long line of canned shallow hatchet jobs on biblical thought and history to which I will not at this time type out yet another response. It was nominally more thoughtful than saying "sky wizard though. I’ll grant that.
[/quote]
No more canned that continually referring back to some corrupted or disputed scripture of dubious origin.
[quote]Eli B wrote:<<< high-school kids. >>>[/quote]Nothing but an overwhelming move of the power and transforming might of the most high God will stop that generation from driving the final nail into the coffin lid of this once great nation.
