GOP responses to State of the Union

[donner]

They rejected civil unions, which is marriage without defiling a Christian church, more than once. Sure, hey were told no at first. They're only trying to overturn thousands of years of cultural tradition predating Christianity and expecting it to happen overnight. But hey, I'm sure you're waaaaay smarter than the countless generations of countless different cultures and religions that all define marriage as a joining of a man and a woman. The fact is the homosexuals would already be able to "marry" if they didn't try to cram their way of life down everybody's throats and attack anyone who did not agree.

There are several fundamental problems with your argument. First, there are many examples of previous cultures that allowed same-sex relationships, so it's not as cut and dry as you want it to be. Second, not all 'marriages' in modern society are Christian. People get married all the time who aren't Christian and they still benefit from the legal advantages of being 'married.' The tax benefit, inheritance benefit and legal recognitions from being married aren't just for Christians.

Civil unions aren't the same as marriages since, IIRC, each state was having to pass laws allowing civil unions, whereas marriages were already recognized. In fact, i think there are only three states that recognize civil unions and that recognition doesn't extend beyond state lines.

It's also a very 'separate but equal' type of argument. Why add laws that only complicate things where there is already a way of allowing this? Just because you don't like their lifestyle or tactics, why should they be denied the same legal advantages being married provides?

Gays would probably also be able to marry by now if people stopped trying to tell them how to live their lives.

People on the right have suggested it. And I agree that it should be available for straight people as well. The problem is that it wouldn't be good enough for gay people for that reason. The reason people like me want it kept out of churches is that they are twisting Christianity to suit their own agenda. Of course I'm not allowed to be offended by this because that makes me an intolerant hate monger. Of course if I were a Muslim it would be ok to be offended.

So you speak for all gays now? How do you know what is good enough for all of them? Also, clearly you do not speak for all Christians since there are Christian churches that officiate gay marriages. Are those people 'twisting' it or merely interpreting their understanding of the Bible differently than yours?

 

[Dukester]

There are several fundamental problems with your argument. First, there are many examples of previous cultures that allowed same-sex relationships, so it's not as cut and dry as you want it to be. Second, not all 'marriages' in modern society are Christian. People get married all the time who aren't Christian and they still benefit from the legal advantages of being 'married.'

Civil unions aren't the same as marriages since, IIRC, each state was having to pass laws allowing civil unions, whereas marriages were already recognized. It's also a very 'separate but equal' type of argument. Why add laws that only complicate things where there is already a way of allowing this? Just because you don't like their lifestyle or tactics, why should they be denied the same legal advantages being married provides?



So you speak for all gays now? How do you know what is good enough for all of them? Also, clearly you do not speak for all Christians since there are Christian churches that officiate gay marriages. Are those people 'twisting' it or merely interpreting their understanding of the Bible differently than yours?

They already said it isn't good enough! At least the most vocal groups anyway.
Please enlighten me with your insurmountable knowledge as to which cultures throughout history acknowledged gay marriage. Some might have tolerated gay acts or whatever, but I'm talking marriage. The primary fundamental problem with your argument is that your are wrong.
Since you simply see what you want to see, I wont point out that I never said that no churches perform gay weddings. And yes they ARE twisting Christianity to suit their agendas because the bible is very clear on the subject. You can either read or you cant. Hand the computer to someone who has a clue.

 

[donner]

They already said it isn't good enough! At least the most vocal groups anyway.
Please enlighten me with your insurmountable knowledge as to which cultures throughout history acknowledged gay marriage. Some might have tolerated gay acts or whatever, but I'm talking marriage. The primary fundamental problem with your argument is that your are wrong.
Since you simply see what you want to see, I wont point out that I never said that no churches perform gay weddings. And yes they ARE twisting Christianity to suit their agendas because the bible is very clear on the subject. You can either read or you cant. Hand the computer to someone who has a clue.

Yes, you are correct, i should have been more accurate to say that cultures tolerated gay acts, i was not specific enough.

And yes, it also sucks when the most vocal group says second-class legal protections aren't enough.

As to the rest, all i asked was why are some Christian churches allowing it in if it's such a twisting of the Bible. Also, you still have failed to show me how civil unions accomplish the same things as marriages in terms of the legal recognition they provide. You seem to not understand why same-sex couples would want to be married, i offered a reason, you have yet to refute it. Please do so.

 

[farmerbyron]

Yes, you are correct, i should have been more accurate to say that cultures tolerated gay acts, i was not specific enough.

And yes, it also sucks when the most vocal group says second-class legal protections aren't enough.

As to the rest, all i asked was why are some Christian churches allowing it in if it's such a twisting of the Bible. Also, you still have failed to show me how civil unions accomplish the same things as marriages in terms of the legal recognition they provide. You seem to not understand why same-sex couples would want to be married, i offered a reason, you have yet to refute it. Please do so.

From what I have read from duke, he seems to think their sole purpose in wanting marriage is an attack on Christianity.

 

[Dukester]

Yes, you are correct, i should have been more accurate to say that cultures tolerated gay acts, i was not specific enough.

As to the rest, all i asked was why are some Christian churches allowing it in if it's such a twisting of the Bible. Also, you still have failed to show me how civil unions accomplish the same things as marriages in terms of the legal recognition they provide. You seem to not understand why same-sex couples would want to be married, i offered a reason, you have yet to refute it. Please do so.

Its churches being PC at the cost of their principals. Have you ever read the bible and what it says about homosexuality? There is no grey area there. Gay people should be able to be joined in every legal way that straight people are. Just keep it out of the church. Don't change the religion of millions upon millions of people so a small group of people can feel better. You have yet to make a single valid argument.

 

[Dukester]

From what I have read from duke, he seems to think their sole purpose in wanting marriage is an attack on Christianity.

Wow, that's just ignorant.

 

[farmerbyron]

Wow, that's just ignorant.

Agreed.

They were offer
They rejected civil unions, which is marriage without defiling a Christian church, more than once. Sure, hey were told no at first. They're only trying to overturn thousands of years of cultural tradition predating Christianity and expecting it to happen overnight. But hey, I'm sure you're waaaaay smarter than the countless generations of countless different cultures and religions that all define marriage as a joining of a man and a woman. The fact is the homosexuals would already be able to "marry" if they didn't try to cram their way of life down everybody's throats and attack anyone who did not agree.

People on the right have suggested it. And I agree that it should be available for straight people as well. The problem is that it wouldn't be good enough for gay people for that reason. The reason people like me want it kept out of churches is that they are twisting Christianity to suit their own agenda. Of course I'm not allowed to be offended by this because that makes me an intolerant hate monger. Of course if I were a Muslim it would be ok to be offended.

They already said it isn't good enough! At least the most vocal groups anyway.
Please enlighten me with your insurmountable knowledge as to which cultures throughout history acknowledged gay marriage. Some might have tolerated gay acts or whatever, but I'm talking marriage. The primary fundamental problem with your argument is that your are wrong.
Since you simply see what you want to see, I wont point out that I never said that no churches perform gay weddings. And yes they ARE twisting Christianity to suit their agendas because the bible is very clear on the subject. You can either read or you cant. Hand the computer to someone who has a clue.

 

[farmerbyron]

Its churches being PC at the cost of their principals. Have you ever read the bible and what it says about homosexuality? There is no grey area there. Gay people should be able to be joined in every legal way that straight people are. Just keep it out of my church. Don't change the religion of millions upon millions of people so a small group of people can feel better. You have yet to make a single valid argument.

FIFY



Ever wonder why there are so many denominations of christianity? Your church can have every right to not wed gay folks but that does not mean that their church can not exist because your church disagrees with it.



Damn, we are off topic here.

 

[donner]

Its churches being PC at the cost of their principals. Have you ever read the bible and what it says about homosexuality? There is no grey area there. Gay people should be able to be joined in every legal way that straight people are. Just keep it out of the church. Don't change the religion of millions upon millions of people so a small group of people can feel better. You have yet to make a single valid argument.

If you feel my argument is invalid then please explain how civil unions are the same as marriages in terms of legal protection? As i said, there are very few states that recognize civil unions (something around three i think). If those unions aren't recognized across state lines, by the federal government or other institutions then they are inherently unequal. I suspect that is why many gay couples seek the same recognition that is afforded to straight couples. Same-sex couples haven't been offered the same legal representation as heterosexual couples and that is why it keeps being an issue.

I really don't care if you call it unions, marriage, or whatever else but you cannot argue for something that isn't legally equal and expect same-sex couples to accept it. I also really don't care if some churches don't want to 'marry' couples and others do, but until the legal issues are resolved it will remain a bigger deal than it really ought to be.

Also, I didn't realize Christianity was so fragile that it cannot withstand thousands of people wanting to use the same word as it does to define a commitment to another person.

 

[Lurker66]

They were offer
They rejected civil unions, which is marriage without defiling a Christian church, more than once. Sure, hey were told no at first. They're only trying to overturn thousands of years of cultural tradition predating Christianity and expecting it to happen overnight. But hey, I'm sure you're waaaaay smarter than the countless generations of countless different cultures and religions that all define marriage as a joining of a man and a woman. The fact is the homosexuals would already be able to "marry" if they didn't try to cram their way of life down everybody's throats and attack anyone who did not agree.

Yes, way smarter, better educated, healthier, more knowledgeable about culture, other culture, social norms, politics and a lot of other stuff.

When your rights are violated you would want it to stop immediately. You wouldnt want to wait for generations as cultural norm and political attitudes change.

This is why your logic fails and its why gays are in your face. Hey yall can marry when when I grow to accept it.