Thought on homosexuality and same sex marriage

[IceDevil9]

One of the few things in this time that I am proud to be an American for is its' stance, and Bush's stance, on topics such as homosexuality and abortion.

Which is the exact reason I'm sometimes ashamed to admit I'm American.

-Frank

 

[Lights]

I really don't think you understand what I am saying. I could care less if someone is homosexual, the only thing in this perspective I don't like about them is the actual homosexual act itself.

I really hate it when people say that. "The Lord doesnt hate you, He just hates the sin. So pay me 10% of your income, and He'll forgive you!" That's such a hypocritical stance, not to mention a load of bs.

 

[Tipsy]

I really hate it when people say that. "The Lord doesnt hate you, He just hates the sin. So pay me 10% of your income, and He'll forgive you!" That's such a hypocritical stance, not to mention a load of bs.

Just think of it as with parents and their child. No matter what their child does they are still going to love them, even if the child does something they completely hate. If your child went and murdered someone would you still love them? I'm generalizing this a bit, but it gets the point across.

As for the Lord, he will always love you regardless. Theres a famous painting with a guy standing outside a door with no handle on it. It means God is always out there waiting for you, but you have to open the door. The point of this, he will always love you and is always waiting for you open the door for him.

Also, I might just be reading or understanding it wrong, but when you say "pay me 10% of your income", if you are refering to giving the church money, you do not by any means have to give the church money and it is up to you how much you give them. You could go to a church all your life and not give them a single penny. You do not have to pay for anything at all.

 

[Laharl]

Tipsy don't TRY to "Save my soul". Save your own before you worry about anybody else. Then your words will be meaningful.

I'm still waiting for somebody to ask me why I was away, in the hospital.

 

[The_Raven7]

He runs with the other boys, experiences puberty's onset and discovers several areas of his body that mysteriously sprouted hair overnight.
Boys and girls start to discover that the opposite sex really isn't all that "yucky" after all. But the boy-child is finding an endearment not toward girls, but toward boys.
Wait. This can't happen. This is strange, confusing and horrific. What if the others catch wind of this? So the proverbial closet door shuts for the first time with a scared and confused adolescent taking shelter in the darkness cast by society's generally negative perception of homosexuality.
As the boy grows into his mid-to-late teen years, he'll experience an overwhelming auditory assault of homophobic slang phrases such as: "What a fag," "That's so gay" and/or "You homo," among many, many others.
All will laugh. Even the closeted adolescent will, if just to hide himself while being verbally derogated. It's his secret, and no one knows about it. After all, the general assumption by society is that EVERYONE is born heterosexual.
The rest of his story, summarized, is that after years of "closeting" himself in fear, having secret relationships with other guys (that result in a positive confirmation that the boy is indeed gay) and feeling claustrophobic behind that damned closet door, he finally snaps. That's it. He cannot take it anymore.
He opens the door, he steps out and allows himself the freedom to be who he truly is - the person he was BORN as.
Homosexuality is NOT a choice.
Who in their right mind would CHOOSE to be gay with all the stigmas, fears and violent acts directed toward gays by society?
When confronted with the possibility of ostracism for leading a "taboo" lifestyle, being granted few (if any) legal rights or protections, and the threat of suffering violent (sometimes deadly) acts of homophobia, then tell me: Who would freely DECIDE to be homosexual?
But people love to throw the church, the Bible, Jesus Christ and God into the equation. Let me guess: the Bible says homosexuality is wrong. Check the story of Cain and Abel. God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, right?
This implies that gay people are the spawn of Satan, as if we're all inherently evil, soulless sub-humans, void of any spiritual beliefs whatsoever.
Then there's the issue of genetics and scientific research. True, there is no research that has proven that being gay isn't a choice. But how can such research be done? By trapping an adolescent like a lab-rat and monitoring his brain-activity to determine if he does indeed CHOOSE to like boys instead of girls at the onset of hormonal rage?
And then there's always those uneducated assumptions that gay people either come from troubled or broken homes, or were raised mostly (or solely) by family members of the opposite sex.
These "theories" are all completely unsubstantiated.
Men will not always turn out gay just because they were raised by a mother and three sisters. They may just end up with a greater respect for and understanding of women.

And how do we know for sure that people weren't born gay? Research hasn't been able to present any certainties and religious dogmas can't agree on whether or not the Bible does indeed say that being gay is "wrong." What about those churches that welcome gay people? What about those churches that have gay priests, clergy and staff?
The only choice involved with being gay is when a person decides between living in the closet and hiding behind a facade, or deciding to accept, acknowledge and BE who they are.
And what of that adolescent, as he made the transition into adulthood?
Well, with loving compassion toward himself, the young man peeked his head out the closet door. Then he kicked it down in the name of truth. Freedom is beautiful.

 

[Tipsy]

As the boy grows into his mid-to-late teen years, he'll experience an overwhelming auditory assault of homophobic slang phrases such as: "What a fag," "That's so gay" and/or "You homo," among many, many others.

I'm wondering what kind of world the person who wrote this lives in, whether your gay or not, all those phrases pop up to heterosexuals as well. For an example, there is this one Mexican kid at my school who is called all of that plus more but he isn't homosexual. Your going to be verbally assualted by people no matter what your beliefs are because there is always someone who believes the opposite of you.

He opens the door, he steps out and allows himself the freedom to be who he truly is - the person he was BORN as.

You say he is going to be the person he was born as, and yet a few lines later in the post you write:
"...And how do we know for sure that people weren't born gay? Research hasn't been able to present any certainties..."
And continuing on this point:

Homosexuality is NOT a choice.

You completely contradicted yourself.

Who in their right mind would CHOOSE to be gay with all the stigmas, fears and violent acts directed toward gays by society?

Why did Christains choose to follow Christ even though they were being persecuted in killed in horrible ways? (thats a rhetorical question)

When confronted with the possibility of ostracism for leading a "taboo" lifestyle, being granted few (if any) legal rights or protections, and the threat of suffering violent (sometimes deadly) acts of homophobia, then tell me:

Your rights do not change, atleast where I live, if you are homosexual or not. People may hate you, but you still have the same rights everybody else does. As for the deadly and hostile acts of homophobia, that is what normally hapens to minorities.

Who would freely DECIDE to be homosexual?

People with homosexual urges?

But people love to throw the church, the Bible, Jesus Christ and God into the equation. Let me guess: the Bible says homosexuality is wrong. Check the story of Cain and Abel. God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, right?

If you comprehend what it says and doctrine and dogma concerning the topic, there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a homosexual, it is the act of homosexuality itself. As I use in many of my examples, if you have an urge to kill some that is completely different than actually killing them.

This implies that gay people are the spawn of Satan, as if we're all inherently evil, soulless sub-humans, void of any spiritual beliefs whatsoever.

I really think this was pulled right out of your ass. The homosexual act itself is a choice and being born may or may not be genetic for the sake of argument. You choose what actions your body makes even if you choose to do nothing. The homosexual act is looked down upon by the church because of the same reason some types of heterosexual acts are as well. The definition of sex simplified is intercourse that is meant to show love between a married couple AND to procreate. This is why protection is looked down upon. The church has nothing against homosexuals just the way homosexuals get pleasure from each other through so called gay sex.

Then there's the issue of genetics and scientific research. True, there is no research that has proven that being gay isn't a choice. But how can such research be done? By trapping an adolescent like a lab-rat and monitoring his brain-activity to determine if he does indeed CHOOSE to like boys instead of girls at the onset of hormonal rage?
And then there's always those uneducated assumptions that gay people either come from troubled or broken homes, or were raised mostly (or solely) by family members of the opposite sex.
These "theories" are all completely unsubstantiated.
Men will not always turn out gay just because they were raised by a mother and three sisters. They may just end up with a greater respect for and understanding of women.

May I ask what makes your hypothesis about about how homosexuality is not a choice is any more credible than any argument out there? It doesn't matter whether you are a homosexual or not to me or the church, it is the actual homosexual act.

...and religious dogmas can't agree on whether or not the Bible does indeed say that being gay is "wrong."

Being gay is wrong to the church because of the reasons I put above.

What about those churches that welcome gay people? What about those churches that have gay priests, clergy and staff?
The only choice involved with being gay is when a person decides between living in the closet and hiding behind a facade, or deciding to accept, acknowledge and BE who they are.
And what of that adolescent, as he made the transition into adulthood?
Well, with loving compassion toward himself, the young man peeked his head out the closet door. Then he kicked it down in the name of truth.

I'm not sure if you know this or not, but everybody is welcomed into the Catholic church regardless of who they are or what they have done. It should probably give you a hint because catholic means universal. I have no less respect for people who say that they have gay urges, and I have more repsect for people who have those and do not act upon them.

The entire homosexual thing is completely blown out of proportion. The reason the church thinks homosexuality is wrong is the same reason why it thinks condoms, the pill, oral sex, etc are wrong. It has nothing to do with a person being homosexual, it is the act of homosexuality itself.

Tipsy don't TRY to "Save my soul". Save your own before you worry about anybody else. Then your words will be meaningful.

I'm going to try to help anyone I can with their issues because after all, I believe we all have the same father.

I'm still waiting for somebody to ask me why I was away, in the hospital.

If you check the rules thread it says that kind of stuff is for the chit-chat forum:

No Chatting - and that also means that this is not the Agony Aunt section! Fair enough if you want to debate, for instance, whether it's ethical to date a friend's ex... but if you're looking for sympathy/ advice on your personal life, or dieting tips, ask for it in Chit-Chat.

 

[Lights]

Tipsy, if science proves that there is a homosexual gene, and that there isn't a choice for some people (I dont deny some, maybe most, homosexual feelings are cultured), what then? Would your views change any? If a person really is homosexual from birth, is homsexual because God created him that way, would it change anything for you?

 

[Tipsy]

I don't think my point is getting across. It does not matter if you have homosexual urges anywhere in my argument. The only problem is that with homosexuality you choose to have homosexual acts, even if you didn't choose to be homosexual. Gay marriage and so called gay sex are both against the definition of marriage and sex to the church. To the church marriage is a contract between a man, a woman, and God. Sex is a way to show your love to your spouse AND (keyword AND) to procreate. In order for gay sex to be considered acceptable then as I said above heterosexual values would be changed too. Just to reitterate it, gay marriage and gay sex is not because the church wants to oppress gay people or whatever you think it wants, it is to keep marriage and sex morally correct to what they consider right also being what God considers right (the whole infallibility of the pope thing).

 

[B~E]

Tipsy, if science proves that there is a homosexual gene, and that there isn't a choice for some people (I dont deny some, maybe most, homosexual feelings are cultured), what then? Would your views change any? If a person really is homosexual from birth, is homsexual because God created him that way, would it change anything for you?

Come on light, now we've already stated that it isn't the state of being homosexual thats regarded as bad by the Church. Its the act itself. Its ok to have an urge to kill your wife, but nobody's going to come after you for that, unless you live in the nightmarish world described in minority report.

So being born homosexual or being one by choice doesn't even matter. In both case, its up to you to chose to commit the "sin" or not. We have freewill, it is all up to us.

 

[CelestialBadger]

Gj, you win the point that Judeo-Christians view homosexuality as a sin. Eh...I won't argue with you on that one.

 

[B~E]

I'm happy your sharing this with us. But actualy, we shouldn't even be arguying on that anymore. We've proved that Christianity was fundamentaly opposed to homosexuality, and since it still hold an important influence over marriage, homosexual simply cannot mary under God.
The issue, at that point, is either should the Church still hold influence over the institution of marriage, or should it be secual and considered a state institution.

 

[Lights]

I'm happy your sharing this with us. But actualy, we shouldn't even be arguying on that anymore. We've proved that Christianity was fundamentaly opposed to homosexuality, and since it still hold an important influence over marriage, homosexual simply cannot mary under God.
The issue, at that point, is either should the Church still hold influence over the institution of marriage, or should it be secual and considered a state institution.

Well, we haven't really proven the second part. There are two types of marriage. One underneath a religious leader and one underneath a civil leader. Both have the power to conduct a ceremony. I, and homosexuals, are not asking to be allowed to be married underneath a religious leader. I am talking about married from a civil court, one that has no religious ties. And there is no reason whatsoever that, underneath a civil leader and court, that homosexuals shouldn't be married, beyond religion, that is.

I don't think my point is getting across. It does not matter if you have homosexual urges anywhere in my argument. The only problem is that with homosexuality you choose to have homosexual acts, even if you didn't choose to be homosexual. Gay marriage and so called gay sex are both against the definition of marriage and sex to the church. To the church marriage is a contract between a man, a woman, and God. Sex is a way to show your love to your spouse AND (keyword AND) to procreate. In order for gay sex to be considered acceptable then as I said above heterosexual values would be changed too. Just to reitterate it, gay marriage and gay sex is not because the church wants to oppress gay people or whatever you think it wants, it is to keep marriage and sex morally correct to what they consider right also being what God considers right (the whole infallibility of the pope thing).

I dont think I am getting my point across. I DONT CARE WHAT THE BLOODY CHURCH THINGS, FEEL, OR BELIEVES IS MORALLY RIGHT. I am talking about a civil marriage, one that hs NOTHING AT ALL to do with the Church. The Church can have their moral beliefs, they can preach it to the followers, but enforcing that doctrine into the secular government is unacceptable. I dont care where marriage started, we are talking about here and now.

Is there any reason beyond religious beliefs and the so-called 'sanctity of marriage' that homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to marry under the title "marry?" For if there isn't, there is no reason at all.

The reason why I asked you that question, is that if homosexuals were created and designed by God. If they were given those urges by God Himself, would it change your view? I am not talking about acting on those urges or anything, just the instinct. For, if he inbred them the instinct and desire, and knew that was the path they would take, why would it be an abomination?

 

[Tipsy]

Well now that we're past why my religion believes homosexuality is a sin and why we believe that it is morally wrong I will get back to what BE is talking about.

I am assuming this is the opinion of all the parties arguing on this, but it has been said a lot in this thread that the government must be seperated from religion.

For now I'm just going to start stating stuff on the point above. I think it was four of five pages ago I talked about the routes of marriage. It was first used by the Hebrews. Just to point out a fact about this. I posted this about 4 or 5 pages ago.

One of the arguments that marriage should be allowed to be same-sex is the benefits. Heres a list I looked up for everyone of all the benefits you get for being married:
Autopsy examination consent
Burial rights of service member's dependents
Child custody in divorce proceedings
Cohabitation on military and other controlled properties.
Community property control, division, acquisition, and disposition
Exemption from conveyance tax
Court notice of probate proceedings
Death benefit for surviving spouse for government employee
Domestic violence protection orders
Existing homestead lease continuation of rights
Regulation of condominium sales to owner-occupants exemption
Funeral and bereavement leave
Joint adoption and foster care
Joint tax filing
Property tax exemption for homes of totally disabled veterans
Income tax deductions, credits, rates exemption, and estimates
Insurance licenses, coverage, eligibility, and benefits organization of mutual benefits society
Legal status with stepchildren
Making, revoking, and objecting to post-mortem anatomical gifts
Making spousal medical decisions
Spousal non-resident tuition deferential waiver
Payment of wages and workers compensation benefits after worker death
Permission to make arrangements for burial or cremation
Right of survivorship of custodial trust
Right to change surname upon marriage
Right to enter into pre-nuptial agreement
Right to inheritance of property
Right to sue for tort and wrongful death
Right to child support after divorce
Spousal privilege and confidential marriage communications
Spousal immigration benefits
Spouse of veteran medical care discount
Status as next-of-kin
Visitation privileges to imprisoned spouse
Visitation privileges to spouse in hospital

There is also the point BE brought up about marriage being a secular institution or a religious insititution. I personally would rather have marriage be only religious and to take away the benefits given by the state because I want to be in the sacrement of marriage for religious purposes, not so I can get benefits with a loved one. I want to show you the routes or marriage. I posted this back a few pages:

"Marriage was first recorded in 2500 BC when men and women had short marriages between themselves and members of other tribes. Marriage then developed from that into the marriage similar to what is seen today (except theirs was more stable). Marriage continued developing as the Hebrews became the Jews, and then Christainity was made from Judaism. So if you follow all of that, it is accepted by historians today that marriage was created by the Hebrews. So if you follow all of this, marriage is a Christain, Islamic, and Jewish created thing. All three of these religions have the same patriarch."

Now from what I wrote above it is clearly shown that marriage was created by the Hebrews, the ancestors of the Christains. Now onto marriage coming to the United States. In the United States when it was just the colonies marriage was founded by Judeo-Christain values. The founding fathers later founded the country on these same Judeo-Christain values.

Okay, now that the facts are over, I'll get to my belief on this. Here are the options I can think of for marriage.
-Abolish State Marriages
This would take away the benefits which I myself care little about, but it would also take out such argument such as 'laws discriminating by gender'. This would be more of a compromise between the church and the state and it does seem like an extreme to me.
-Abolish Religious Marrages
Had to put this in because it was the opposite of abolish state marriage. This will never happen because the United States has no power over the Vatican and cannot change the church.
-Ammend to ban same-sex marriage
This would be an example of democracy not working the way it is suppose to, but hey, I would support this because of the reasons I have stated in the last 10 pages about why I believe gay marriage is wrong.
-Ammend to allow same-sex marriage/No ammendment and let same-sex couples marry.
This will also probably never happen due to democracy is as I have put it a monarch of the many.

Those are the four basic options I can think of. I and the church would both be happy for the first and third of these because as I have put it, we believe it is immoral. Also, marriage is a tradition of Christain ancestors and it is theirs to mess with however they please because they are a private organization. The state on the otherhand only has the power to marry because the country was founded on Judeo-Christain values. The founding fathers intended for God to stay central in government even though there was to be freedom of religion. You can see this clearly if you read some of their writings. The question I am asking is would you all (people arguing for same-sex marriage) be content if state marriages were abolished? I personally feel the government has no place in marriage because it only had it in the first place because it was founded on Judeo-Christain values.

Also onto the one thing that is always raised against this. A secular government CANNOT exist if religion exists. Religion influences the leaders of a country's morals, values, ideals, beliefs, and most importantly how they view and act upon what happens to them in their job. Even with a person who is an atheist would feel differently about issues of church and state because he would think God does not exist and that is that. A state can try to be secular but it never will as long as religion exists. I think I got everything in here, but if I skipped something let me know.

The reason why I asked you that question, is that if homosexuals were created and designed by God. If they were given those urges by God Himself, would it change your view? I am not talking about acting on those urges or anything, just the instinct. For, if he inbred them the instinct and desire, and knew that was the path they would take, why would it be an abomination?

The point is it does not matter where your urges come from, genetics, environment, God, Satan, Zues, Athena, Bob Dole, choclate cake, etc, the only thing that matters is the actions you take on the urges. Also, a lot of what you are asking has to do with free will.

 

[Onmyoji the Hidden]

Massachusetts

 

[Sogeking]

lets start a vote,

the_raven7 should be banned from arcane

Yes or No?


on a side note, why are you making opinions and trying to make them fact? you think every christian is brainwashed? proove it.

 

[Onmyoji the Hidden]

lets start a vote,

the_raven7 should be banned from arcane

Yes or No?


on a side note, why are you making opinions and trying to make them fact? you think every christian is brainwashed? proove it.

He's just angry, let him vent. Everyone SHOULD do it every now and then. And yes, I would say the same thing if a Christian did the same annoying oversize caps thing. Even though I would tend to agree with him on the fact that the bible (if taken for ultimate truth) is pretty ridiculous.

 

[Sogeking]

the thing is, its not like tipsy has no kind of argument whatsoever, otherwise he would have been banned long ago...

 

[B~E]

He's just angry, let him vent. Everyone SHOULD do it every now and then. And yes, I would say the same thing if a Christian did the same annoying oversize caps thing. Even though I would tend to agree with him on the fact that the bible (if taken for ultimate truth) is pretty ridiculous.

Agreed, but if somebody takes things too personally around here, and if he really must vent, he might as well do it in an appropriate place, like the asylum. Not here.

 

[Sogeking]

it just bugs me when people generalize :-/ even though sometimes i generalize about the opposite sex

 

[B~E]

We have entered the circular state of the debate, where nearly everything that could be said was said, and we're just moving in circle chasing the same old arguments. If you weren't convinced yet, I dont think you will be by us. But at least we have examined the subject by and large, on everyside possible, and for this, we should congratulate ourself.

I guess someone with an hard ass could reread this whole topic pretty fast, and sum up what we've duscussed, and what we've agreed on.

edit: and if someone in the future, dare to make another thread on this subect, he's banned.