standing_alone
Well-Known Member
Because homosexuals are human.
I second that motion.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Because homosexuals are human.
nutshell said:The definition of marriage seems to be inadequate for your present needs. It meets my needs just fine.
nutshell said:You misunderstood me. It was legit. A higher power recognizes the marriage as secularly legal whether it's stated or not.
Ormiston said:The point is it's not adequate for everyones' needs. Thus, "our present needs."
Victor said:Our system of law and how the a society functions as a whole IS NOT in the fulfilling needs business. If it were then pedophiles, rapist, theives, etc. should get their fair share too. (This was not meant as a comparison so please don't use it as such).
Quite honestly, I don't really think your opinion matters much in this case. You're not getting married to a gay person (that I know of), you're not being denied rights, you won't be hurt if it is legalized. Why should I be denied 1000+ rights given to heterosexual couples just because a god I don't believe in says so? I don't think incest is a nice thing, but I don't have the ego to think my opinion makes a damn difference one way or another between two people who are in an incestuous relationship.nutshell said:That's your opinion. Obviously, Victor and I believe the arguments do hold water.
Victor said:Our system of law and how the a society functions as a whole IS NOT in the fulfilling needs business. If it were then pedophiles, rapist, theives, etc. should get their fair share too. (This was not meant as a comparison so please don't use it as such).
Ormiston said:I couldn't have said it better myself! This issue doesn't come down to what people can do, it comes down to what they can't. The laws are for protection and setting limits on what people can do. It's never about "allowing" but "denying". So the homosexuals should not have to state why they should be allowed to get married. Those who oppose it have the burden of showing why they can't. And I have not heard a single convincing argument as to why they should NOT be allowed to get married.
why is hetrosexual marraige a human right?nutshell said:No one has yet to answer my original question so let me restate it.
Give me compelling evidence that same sex marrigage is a human right.
Jensa said:Quite honestly, I don't really think your opinion matters much in this case. You're not getting married to a gay person (that I know of), you're not being denied rights, you won't be hurt if it is legalized. Why should I be denied 1000+ rights given to heterosexual couples just because a god I don't believe in says so? I don't think incest is a nice thing, but I don't have the ego to think my opinion makes a damn difference one way or another between two people who are in an incestuous relationship.
Mike182 said:why is hetrosexual marraige a human right?
standing_alone said:I second that motion.
nutshell said:Once again, a poster is answering my question with a question.
yes i am, but that does not make it invalid *bangs head on wall* ok, let me say this then: gay marriage is as much a right as straight marriagenutshell said:Once again, a poster is answering my question with a question.
pah said:I wonder what qualifies the God of Moses to be worshipped. Didn't we have that golden calf that was traditional?
What says "worship" is a "human right"? Tell me that, nutshell, and you'll have your answer.
Who cares about who came first. It was not a "fact" I presented and you assume too much.nutshell said:The God of Moses pre-dated the golden calf. The God of Moses is Jehovah who was at the beginning. The imply the golden calf came first is rediculous. The Hebrews worshipped Jehovah before they went to Egypt. Once there, they were corrupted by Egypt tradition, and once they left, they eventually returned to thier true God.
Get your facts straight next time and then I might answer your second question.
Once again, a poster is answering my question with a question.
Secular mararriage has NEVER been sacred. All marriage today is secular. You are wrong, flat out wrong, to apply that word to a secular institution and perhaps more in error to think that a religious "sacredness" should be in a secular government.nutshell said:"We" is obviously those who wish to keep marriage sacred - I expect you don't understand what that means since you're hung up on legal issues. The fact that you call it "some stupid title or word" shows your ignorance regarding how "we" view marriage.
Further, I am not insecure at all. I am seeking to protect an institution created and define by God Himself.
nutshell said:And I could care less about your opinion or ego or anything else.
In the context of this debate, all I care about is marriage.
nutshell said:It doesn't work at all because society has always defined rules and one of the rules is that you must be a single man and single woman to be married. I know that the rules are not always right. I'm in an interracial marriage that would have been prevented not so long ago. However, what all those marriages have in common is this: They are between one man and one woman. I do not believe in a human right granting marriage to members of the same sex.