Marriage is a civil right in the US

There are seething cauldrons of discord and conflict and there are seething cauldrons of discord and conflict. Whilst a person might despair at the seething cauldron that society has made for itself, they are trying to resist those who want to pull society over the brim and into the fire. As is their right.Ever consider that your views might be held as nutball by others?

No Faith. Not always.

Ok well I kind of said it rather quickly to save time. In christian theology marriage has been around since Adam and Eve. Genesis 2:15 "Adam and his wife" (just part of the verse, but it makes the point). Hence if you are a bible believer (which I take you probably are not) then marraige has been around since the begining of man and this explains why all cultures and religions have marriage, because it has always been.This is just an attempt to explain how christians claim ownership of marriage. Call it obserd if you will, but it makes sense for them to do so if the scripture is what they believe. I have agnostic friends who think that all non christians should have civil unions, take this as extreme if you will. Not sure why you thought that needed a question mark, but anyway. As I just explained this isnt a problem. To clarify, in no way do christians believe that there was no marraige before Jesus and that he told everyone that we should all get married. marriage defenition

1. The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
2. The state of being married; wedlock.
3. A common-law marriage.
4. A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage.

I just dont think the joining of two people of the same sex is marriage. Fair enough if they want the same rights I suppose (not sure about this one though). Oh so you are an expert on the topic and you have the knowledge to say this athough the real cause behind homsexuality is still not known? I assume you are or else you wouldnt be making claims like this. I suppose you could say the same for me however as I did say that they choose. So fair enough . But there are cases of identical twins where one is gay and one is straight. This is a big smack in the face as it pretty much (notice the pretty much) rules out genetics, environment they are raised in, and hormonal conditions in the womb as causes for homosexuality. Meh, well post 499 sounds pretty cool as well.

"analogous to marriage" is not marriage. Nobody is saying homosexuals don't get together for long term relationships, often for life, but marriage is something else, {edit: requiring culture-wide legitimation, which is what we are fighting}. And when they "marry" for a period of time, as some are described as doing in that article, then end it so that a marriage to the opposite sex can take place, that is not really a marriage. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The problem, iano, is theat your position is begging the question. Where is the impending fire?Seriously.People with your possition have existed trughout history, and indeed, thrughout American history. They claim that some big social change is a highway to calimity.I would really love it if someone threw out a date, ya know, a month and year, where society wasn't (suposedly) on the verge of destruction by some sort of moral degeneration or other.Can you show me such a date?Edited by Yaro, : No reason given.

Careful Yaro. Remember to a fundamentalist Christian the world is in a CONTINUAL decline up until the end times. The only difference between the ones of old and now is that they lean on that history of "decline" to come to the conclusion that the end times are even closer.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

See, Jazzns, that's just the thing. They can't make a case for a sort of 'cumilative' decline, because I can name specific societies, cultures, and time periods that were obviously worse than what we have today!I can name time periods in OUR history that were more 'depraved', and hostile to the population, than any description of modern day america. So the point is moot.If anything, it illsutrates an 'up and down' motion and not a steady decline.ABE: Personaly, I feel things are getting better and not getting worse. I tend to be optamistic about the fate of humanity.Edited by Yaro, : No reason given.

so any marriage that ends in divorce or sepperation isnt realy a marriage?oh and quote-mining is fun. nothing 'analogous' there.So what about polygamous, circle or other forms of marriage that are strictly heterosexual, for procreation but with multiple partners, is this marriage? after all it's not 'gay' in any way.

emhasis addedWhat if some people think that objective harm on a reasonable standard will be done? At what point do their wishes become considered? When does something become harmful enough to be outlawed? When does something become harmful enough to have amendments proposed? Won't every amendment proposed have people bitching about it?Most of the answers to these questions are opinions. WRT gay marriage, we don't really know what the results of it will be. Some people think it will be bad, some don't. It looks like enough people oppose it to propose an amendment. Do enough oppose it to outlaw it? I doubt it.ABE: I'm thinking the replies will all be "What harm?" I don't think that needs to be specified for these questions to be examined.Edited by Catholic Scientist, : see ABE:

Yes but remember that is a reasonable position. We are not talking about reasonable we are talking about what the fundie believes.To them the past is a golden age where, although times were hard, the faith was strong and the world was more innocent. Even though the world has gotten "better" in the sense of things such as having better standards for human rights, the faith no longer permeats the world and therefore it is worse. Then there are punctuated issues such as gay rights that just tip the scales of the world to the "hell in a handbasket" state.All I am saying is that the perspective is different and trying to put it in the context of an ever changing landscape of improvements means nothing to someone who believes the world is going to go shit and Jesus is going to come any day now.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

Yes. I have many gay friends, whom I have known for a long time (more than a few before they came out). I have seen the turmoil and pain and suffering that their being gay caused to them and their families. Seen the bigotry and hatred levelled at them and how it hurt them and those around them.Trust me it’s not a matter of choice. They are gay because they are gay not because they ”choose’ to be. The choice is in accepting who they are and being at piece with that, rather than continuing denying their true selves.Edited by ohnhai, : added the word continuing

Tehy say it's plentiful and then describe things that aren't marriage or are extremely rare fringey practices. I'm against polygamy but it's heterosexual and I include it in my statement that all cultures in all times have recognized marriage as the uniting of heteroseuxals.

No more so than asserting gay marriage as moral (or perhaps civil rights) progress is begging the question. The question is, is it a good thing or a bad thing. I say it leads down a slope to moral depravity. You think it leads upwards towards something.It is a subjective thing and we are both entitled to our view on what we consider a) moral depravity to be and b) whether gay marriage leads to that. You might agree with some of your fellow proponants of gay marriage that there is no more reason to legislate against this than there is to legislate against mothers marrying sons or people having numerous wives and husbands. If you do not see that as a 'bad' thing then I cannot help that - my subjective standard as to 'moral fibre of society' differs from yours Its not a question of there never having existed opportunties for moral destruction. At times these opportunities are taken and times not. At times societies utterly destroy themselves (think Roman or 3rd Reich Germany) in their depravity. And they recover and start the cycle all over again.I don't see that societies endless cycle of entering into and emerging from destructive tendencies having any bearing on this issue. That we have done in the past and will do again in the future means we should stand back whilst some, and it is only some, attempt to drag things down again? Hardly.

schrafinator writes

quote:

---

However, it is important to demonstrate (by asking her to clarify) the weakness of her argument and reasons for believing as she does.

---

Yes, I tried that. I pointed out the specific logical fallacies she was using. As far as Faith is concern, her arguments are not weak at all.

There is one big difference. The side in support of civil unions, gay marriage, etc. has facts, reason and evidence on their side. This has been presented in this thread repeatedly. Gay marriage has never been shown to have any harm on a society and the children of gay parents are just as well adjusted as those of straight parents.The side against gay marriage has not offered any evidence to support their side. Everything is based on superstition, prejudice, ignorance and/or a hunch.Guess what, you can certainly think however you want.. but you are wrong. The facts aren't on your side.