California Prop 8?
- Thread starter Nomar
- Start date
:ack: I can see logical thought is a foreign concept to you.
See the difference there?
You want to set the rules for everyone else.
I want to set the rules just for me.
Funny you should mention "traditional" values and religion, right after mentioning the country was founded on religious freedom (which it wasn't by the way, just a number of immigrants came here to escape religious persecution). So lets go back to the "traditional" religious values.
We can have burning at the stake again, that was pretty traditional in it's day. It went on for several thousand years. Can't get much more traditional than that. And maybe the Spanish Inquisition, that's certainly traditional, it lasted for about as long as this continent has been settled by Europeans. And stoning, that's always good for an afternoon. You'd love it too since it's a "tradtional" activity practiced by the Hebrews in the Bible.
I'm sure if we look we can find lots of wonderful traditional values to live by.
Noooo, I never said that. However several "Christian" nut jobs said that, the two most prominent being Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.No Pvmt said:
If you bothered to read my post you'd have noticed I said I didn't agree with what they did, nor excuse it. I can understand something without agreeing with it.
Apparently to you religious freedom means being able to impose your religion on others and force them to live by your particular interpretation. For me religious freedom means everyone being able to live by their own religous morals as long as they don't harm others.
See the difference there?
You want to set the rules for everyone else.
I want to set the rules just for me.
But you didn't when prop 22, basically the same thing, stoping certain people from getting married, failed. So don't lie to us and pretend you'd "live with it".
:rofl: You have such a limited view it's funny. Or would be if you didn't insist on imposing that view on others by forcing them to live by your values.
Funny you should mention "traditional" values and religion, right after mentioning the country was founded on religious freedom (which it wasn't by the way, just a number of immigrants came here to escape religious persecution). So lets go back to the "traditional" religious values.
We can have burning at the stake again, that was pretty traditional in it's day. It went on for several thousand years. Can't get much more traditional than that. And maybe the Spanish Inquisition, that's certainly traditional, it lasted for about as long as this continent has been settled by Europeans. And stoning, that's always good for an afternoon. You'd love it too since it's a "tradtional" activity practiced by the Hebrews in the Bible.
I'm sure if we look we can find lots of wonderful traditional values to live by.
She says she is. Just like you say you are. Since everyone should be happy living their lives like you say they should, people should be happy living their lives like she says they should. After all, you're both "Christians". When would you like everyone to pray for more dead soldiers?
Last edited:
There's a huge difference between showing someone the way, living by example, or teaching when they are receptive, and deciding you don't like what someone does and forcing them to live by your rules.RBBailey said:
Which would you prefer Ben?
1. Obama "educating" people that it's right to pay more in taxes and letting them decide if they want to do it so that the government can give it to those who are poorer?
2. Or Obama deciding it's the right thing to do and taking away your right to your money whether you agree with his views or not.
There is no difference between #2 and Prop 8.2. Or Obama deciding it's the right thing to do and taking away your right to your money whether you agree with his views or not.
Prop 8 would cause no one any more harm than #1 would.
Last edited:
Yes they are. Of course they are. Afterall, they say they are. They can point to chapter and verse to prove they are. How could they not be?varova87 said:
Or tolerance could be, "I think it's wrong for you to sit around all day eating twinkies, but it's your life, so I'm going to ignore it because it's none of my business."RBBailey said:
Last edited:
I understand why religions would not want to bless or otherwise condone, within the confines of the church, a "marriage" between a homosexual couple; it seems to be contrary to their theology. But refusing to permit a gay couple from entering into a "legal" union that has the same legal rights as a married couple is mean-spirited.
Other than a theological argument, which should have no impact on how our legal system operates, what is the case against permitting legal unions between gays?
Why shouldn't they have the right to be as miserable we the rest of us? J/K
Shouldn't they have the right to share real property? To make end of life decisions for one another? To be the beneficiary of their partners earnings and other benefits?
Other than a theological argument, which should have no impact on how our legal system operates, what is the case against permitting legal unions between gays?
Why shouldn't they have the right to be as miserable we the rest of us? J/K
Shouldn't they have the right to share real property? To make end of life decisions for one another? To be the beneficiary of their partners earnings and other benefits?
Last edited:
IMHO the purpose of religion has always been to control peoples behavior. Instead of having to enforce rules of conduct externally, it is easier to have them believe in and self enforce the code of conduct.
Any time the sheep stray from the path chosen by the religion's management then the shit hits the fan. (Spanish inquisition for example).
Since the subscribers to the religion have internalized the code of conduct, they naturally don't want any other folks to enjoy things that have been forbidden by the managers of their various religions.
Hence the desire of religion consumers to dictate the behavior of others.
It is duplicitous and has no moral basis but that has never stopped them from attempting to do so.
Aint religion grand!
Any time the sheep stray from the path chosen by the religion's management then the shit hits the fan. (Spanish inquisition for example).
Since the subscribers to the religion have internalized the code of conduct, they naturally don't want any other folks to enjoy things that have been forbidden by the managers of their various religions.
Hence the desire of religion consumers to dictate the behavior of others.
It is duplicitous and has no moral basis but that has never stopped them from attempting to do so.
Aint religion grand!
CADisco said:
In place:
California Family Code
297.5. (a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights,
protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same
responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they
derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules,
government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources
of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.
(which, to the degree I've looked into it, I'm not against)
Last edited:
Anybody else a fan of the government staying out of marriage, domestic partners, etc? Just eliminate all the benefits and burdens of government specific to a "couple"?
I don't think that is the answer, to take away privileges of everyone just because you don't want to extend them to one group is no way to run a government.
Oh come on that was a brilliant look at religion and god from a comical perspective, you can't be that easily offended and hang out on Dweb can you?
Tom- You can't see that you are talking out both sides of your mouth. You only talk in assumptions. But I must admit you gave me such a good laugh this morning. :rofl: Please go back and re-read your posts. :rofl: All you can do is attack. My original question was what can be done so that both sides can be happy? I’ve concluded that you have your right to your opinion just as I do.
Montana-True in a lot of ways. The thing that makes this world hard and yes even question that there is a God, is the same thing that makes this world great and beautiful. -Free Agency, freedom to choose.
To respond to your sincerity (thank you). Not trying cast my pearls, but my belief is that there is a plan and God does love us, that we are made in his likeness. He has given us a great gift of “Free Agency” this gives us the right to choose to follow or not. What makes him God is that he is all knowing and lives by principles himself. He can’t take this gift away, if does then the plan would fail. So he lets us make mistakes to learn from. Sometimes we make terrible ones, but he still loves us. He wants us to turn to him The Natural man and many of times the Religious man makes the wrong decisions. If He was to fix it or step in to correct or prevent it he would cease to be God. This is because he would be taking away that gift of Free Agency.
Not all people need religion. As a child I was raised going to church, when I went to school I claimed to go to church of the Slick Rock (Moab for MTN Bkng). Always keeping my faith I became more active again.
To me religion is about doing better. Not having to be perfect but trying to be better. And yes even Jesus stood up to those that desecrated the temple. One other great gift that is divine in nature is procreation. I too stand up for my belief that marriage is between a man and a woman. I know that we all have rights. We all live by rules and this has its own consequences. Just like a kite needs a string to fly we as a society needs rules and regulations to fly.
Montana-True in a lot of ways. The thing that makes this world hard and yes even question that there is a God, is the same thing that makes this world great and beautiful. -Free Agency, freedom to choose.
To respond to your sincerity (thank you). Not trying cast my pearls, but my belief is that there is a plan and God does love us, that we are made in his likeness. He has given us a great gift of “Free Agency” this gives us the right to choose to follow or not. What makes him God is that he is all knowing and lives by principles himself. He can’t take this gift away, if does then the plan would fail. So he lets us make mistakes to learn from. Sometimes we make terrible ones, but he still loves us. He wants us to turn to him The Natural man and many of times the Religious man makes the wrong decisions. If He was to fix it or step in to correct or prevent it he would cease to be God. This is because he would be taking away that gift of Free Agency.
Not all people need religion. As a child I was raised going to church, when I went to school I claimed to go to church of the Slick Rock (Moab for MTN Bkng). Always keeping my faith I became more active again.
To me religion is about doing better. Not having to be perfect but trying to be better. And yes even Jesus stood up to those that desecrated the temple. One other great gift that is divine in nature is procreation. I too stand up for my belief that marriage is between a man and a woman. I know that we all have rights. We all live by rules and this has its own consequences. Just like a kite needs a string to fly we as a society needs rules and regulations to fly.
Last edited:
Nopvmt,
Hey man if I wanted to go to church I would go to church. Wow just wow.
How about the idea "god does not micromanage the universe"?
Hey man if I wanted to go to church I would go to church. Wow just wow.
How about the idea "god does not micromanage the universe"?
I know, it's too early! Yeah, I prob. should of said it like you.
No Pvmt said:
The answer is to stay the fuck out of each others private lives... How does the lesbian couple next door keep you and your marriage from being happy? Now, how does restricting marriage to only a man and a woman keep their relationship from being happy? It should be fairly obvious :banghead:
I don't know, the thought of my lesbian neighbors doing it makes my marriage EVEN BETTER!
:dancer:
:dancer:
I haven't looked but fivethirtyeight.com might have the information on prop 8.
My sister lives in San Diego and we both glad that the amendment passed.
My sister lives in San Diego and we both glad that the amendment passed.
No, just taking your arguments to the logical end.No Pvmt said:
Tell me, why do you find hapiness in controlling other people's lives? Which is exactly what you want to do by supporting Prop 8.
I'll make it very simple for you. A simple question.
Give me some examples, hell, I'll settle for one, of how a same sex couple getting married harms you.