LDS letter on same-sex marriage

[Watchmen]

OK, now you're just not even reading our responses before responding.

That seems to be your standard response anytime someone disagrees with you.

The only example here that's equivalent is marijuana. On that I'd vote to legalize it for some of the same reasons I'd vote for same-sex marriage.

But you need to stop ignoring the responses. We already gave you relevant and equivalent examples. What we're saying is that people need to take out their personal beliefs when it comes to issues like gay marriage and religion. Just like we wouldn't vote to ban Mormonism, even though we might think it's immoral and wrong because we understand the value of letting everyone choose their own religion as long as they don't harm anyone, we expect others to not vote to ban something like gay marriage just because they feel that homosexuality is wrong.

Please respond to that rather than making up other examples you think support your point.

My response is that I disagree with you. Maybe you're not reading my posts. For example, you've said nothing of the checks and balances I've referenced multiple times. The fact you had to parse my examples proves personal belief is part of the voting process.

 

[darkendless]

comparing it to Hitler is a very gross overstatement even in the least degree.

He treated homosexuals with as much contempt (but certainly acted much more inhumanely - see my other post, i'm not saying LDS are Nazi's there is a slight resemblence in your rediculous point of view).

I am not advocating treating them any different than anyone else which is what my argument has been the whole time. They mask their demand for special treatment as "equality" when it is anything but. Not giving them education, employment, or housing opportunities, etc. based on their suffering from same-sex attraction is wrong and the law already protects them from discrimination. Marriage, on the other hand, has prerequisites and for good reason. (can't get married to children, have poly-amorous marriages or be married to someone of the same sex)

But the point is you get to marry whoever you want, they can't. Therefore, it is not equal. Its only equal because you can't see past the your belief that religion is between a man and a woman.

How is it special treatment allowing them to marry the person of their choice?

 

[madhatter85]

But the point is you get to marry whoever you want, they can't. Therefore, it is not equal. Its only equal because you can't see past the your belief that religion is between a man and a woman.

How is it special treatment allowing them to marry the person of their choice?

No, I cannot marry whoever I may arbitrarily want.

The law is the same no matter what your sex, age, or sexual preferences may be. it is 100% equal

 

[darkendless]

No, I cannot marry whoever I may arbitrarily want.

The law is the same no matter what your sex, age, or sexual preferences may be. it is 100% equal

Stop being ambiguous. You're a hetreosexual male, you can marry any single woman you are able to by law.

If you're a homosexual male, you either fake a marriage with a woman or you can never get married.

Thats the problem, its not special treatment, its allowing homosexuals to marry someone they love. You can't legislate love, its digusting and watching people defend legislation denying people the right to marry the love of their life is pathetic. Major organisations like the LDS movement who voted down Prop 8 should lose their tax free status for negatively contributing to the well-being of society.

 

[Watchmen]

Major organisations like the LDS movement who voted down Prop 8 should lose their tax free status for negatively contributing to the well-being of society.

That's not how the tax exemption works.

 

[darkendless]

That's not how the tax exemption works.

My apologies, but if they're going to mess with society and waste money fighting moral issues that do not have a clearly positive outcome for society as a whole then they should have to pay tax. My understanding of American tax exemption is minimal so what i said probably makes no sense

 

[gnomon]

A couple of acronyms.......CAIS.........CAH............

Anyone familiar with those?

I would hope that those people who hold such strong views on the law, marriage and sexual identity know what they mean. Because if you do hold strong views but don't know what they mean then well.....................you don't know much of what you are talking about.

 

[Watchmen]

A couple of acronyms.......CAIS.........CAH............

Anyone familiar with those?

I would hope that those people who hold such strong views on the law, marriage and sexual identity know what they mean. Because if you do hold strong views but don't know what they mean then well.....................you don't know much of what you are talking about.

I know what they mean. Do I get brownie points?

 

[gnomon]

I know what they mean. Do I get brownie points?

Good for you. Most people don't. I didn't for most of my life. But it is very important to the debates over marriage equality.

 

[Watchmen]

Good for you. Most people don't. I didn't for most of my life. But it is very important to the debates over marriage equality.

Agreed. I had a great professor who shared these acronyms.

 

[gnomon]

There are two interesting cases in Texas. One involved a transsexual who, during a case in which she sued a doctor after the death of her husband over malpractice, was determined not to have been legally married because she was genetically male and so was her husband. A recent case involves two women who are legally married in Texas because one is intersex (CAH) who was declared male on her birth certificate but is known (drivers license and other forms of ID) as female who married a woman who is genetically female.

Other States do not use chromosomal identity for determining who is a man or woman. So the case for both of those individuals would be different in different States.

Not to pick on madhatter85 but his assertion that it is a simple matter of law earlier just doesn't fly. Not to mention that some States actually recognize gay marriage.

I've actually read of cases where children are declared one sex at birth and without any surgery declared a different sex later in life. There is actually a larger population of such individuals who exhibit a later developmental response to androgens somewhere in Mexico.....if I remember correctly.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Taking personal belief out of voting is absurd.

If there's an initiative that will help business, but harm the environment (or vice versa) how do you vote?

If there's a bond to increase school funding while raising your property taxes, how do you vote?

It's not a matter of taking personal belief out of voting altogether; it's a matter of recognizing that, hopefully, we can make the distinction between our personal standards we try to meet in our own lives and the restrictions we try to impose on others.

Also, a lot of it comes down to empathy and mutual respect: if I don't want others to control my life, then I shouldn't try to control the lives of others.

If there's a proposition to legalize marijuana, how do you vote?

I'd probably vote to legalize it. I don't have any interest in smoking marijuana myself, but I don't see why everyone has to live the way I do.

Similarly, I also have no interest in entering into a same-sex marriage or becoming a member of a church, but I support the right of others to do these things if they so choose.

However you vote on these or any issue will depend on your personal beliefs.

Yes... my beliefs about what I feel justified in imposing on others. These are not necessarily the same beliefs that guide my own sense of what I should and shouldn't do myself.

 

[Magic Man]

That seems to be your standard response anytime someone disagrees with you.

No, it's my response when someone is clearly not even reading the responses to them, like you're doing here.

My response is that I disagree with you. Maybe you're not reading my posts. For example, you've said nothing of the checks and balances I've referenced multiple times. The fact you had to parse my examples proves personal belief is part of the voting process.

Let's start with this: We have now given you a perfect example of what we mean, and you have ignored it multiple times now. You even completely ignored the 3 direct responses to you and just posted the same stuff you've been posting. That's why I say you're not even reading at this point.

I've been reading your posts, which is why I'm responding to them. I don't need to say anything about the checks and balances because they're irrelevant. It doesn't matter whether there are checks and balances in place, people still shouldn't vote based on personal belief in cases like same-sex marriage.

You're also missing the point. We're talking about a specific situation, and you're trying to generalize it. That's not how it works. If you want to talk about our claim, you need to specify and not make it general enough that you're not even responding to our claim anymore. That's why I've been sure to stay specific. When you brought up the absurd comment that personal belief should be part of the voting process, I made sure to say that it shouldn't in cases like same-sex marriage. If you want to talk about other cases, start another thread. If you want to talk about my actual claim, please respond to my example:

I wouldn't vote for banning Mormonism even though I find it disgusting and wrong, because of the value of freedom of religion and the value of letting people do what they want as long as they're not harming anyone. That's what I'm expecting of others here.

 

[PennyKay]

I've just come across this thread, I am honestly shocked by the homophobic remarks by some people!

I knew there was homophobia in the world clearly, but I am shock as to how these horrible people seem almost proud to be homophobic! Arrogantly stating how their views and beliefs take precedence over others.

A question to those who don't agree with sam sex marriage...What difference does it make to your personal life???

 

[Magic Man]

I've just come across this thread, I am honestly shocked by the homophobic remarks by some people!

I knew there was homophobia in the world clearly, but I am shock as to how these horrible people seem almost proud to be homophobic! Arrogantly stating how their views and beliefs take precedence over others.

Check out more of these threads. Unfortunately, you'll stop being shocked by those things, after you see them over and over.

A question to those who don't agree with sam sex marriage...What difference does it make to your personal life???

Haven't you heard? It ruins their marriages! Two homosexual people they don't even know destroys the sanctity of their marriage, even when they don't even know about those other two people getting married.

 

[Autodidact]

Taking personal belief out of voting is absurd.[/qutoe] Well, that's too broad; too simplistic. Some personal beliefs are appropriate to vote with, others not. I believe chocolate is far superior to vanilla; it would not be appropriate to vote to outlaw vanilla. It's more important that everyone have the right to choose their own ice cream flavor, which value you could classify as a different type of belief.

Jews and Muslims believe it's a sin to eat pork. It would not be appropriate for them to vote that no one can eat pork, based on that belief. Another belief--the importance of religious freedom--supercedes it in the secular arena. And that is an important idea in America.

Same-sex marriage is in that category. If you believe it's a sin, then don't do it. It would not be appropriate to vote to take away my right to do it, when I do not believe it is a sin.

 

[Autodidact]

No, I cannot marry whoever I may arbitrarily want.

The law is the same no matter what your sex, age, or sexual preferences may be. it is 100% equal

This is a legal argument you are making. It may interest you to know that every State Supreme Court that has considered this argument has rejected it, including California, which is why Proposition 8 even came into existence. That is why same-sex marriage is legal in 5 states, 4 of them due to court decisions.

But I'm sure you know better.

 

[Autodidact]

A couple of acronyms.......CAIS.........CAH............

Anyone familiar with those?

I would hope that those people who hold such strong views on the law, marriage and sexual identity know what they mean. Because if you do hold strong views but don't know what they mean then well.....................you don't know much of what you are talking about.

Are you referring to Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia? Or something else?

 

[painted wolf]

I've just come across this thread, I am honestly shocked by the homophobic remarks by some people!

I knew there was homophobia in the world clearly, but I am shock as to how these horrible people seem almost proud to be homophobic! Arrogantly stating how their views and beliefs take precedence over others.

A question to those who don't agree with same sex marriage...What difference does it make to your personal life???

It upsets the order of the LDS cosmology. Men and woman are meant to produce the next generations on other planets. Same sex couples clearly can't do that and so it threatens the very future of the universe.

Eventually everyone is going to be LDS... you will convert eventually even if it's after you are dead. Thus being naturally gay (that is god made you that way) makes it possible that God made people who can't become junior gods/goddesses. It's a deep threat to the order of the universe.

This is why being gay must be a choice and a choice that must be stopped.... IMHO.

wa:do

 

[Katzpur]

Eventually everyone is going to be LDS... you will convert eventually even if it's after you are dead. Thus being naturally gay (that is god made you that way) makes it possible that God made people who can't become junior gods/goddesses. It's a deep threat to the order of the universe.

I'm not sure if you're just trying to be funny or if this is what you really think we believe. If it's the latter, you're wrong.